Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Notices 29599

systems, shield systems, and other

protective systems based on tabulated

data provided by a system manufacturer

(Option 3) or obtained from other

sources and approved by a registered

professional engineer (Option 4); they

can also use a design approved by a

registered professional engineer (Option

5). If they select Option 3, employers

must complete a written form that

provides the manufacturer’s

specifications, recommendations, and

limitations, as well as any deviations

approved by the manufacturer. The

paperwork requirements of Option 4 are

the same as Option 1. Option 5 requires

a written form that provides a plan

indicating the sizes, types, and

configurations of the materials used in

the protective system and the identity of

the registered professional engineer who

approved the design.

Each of these provisions requires

employers to maintain a copy of the

documents described in these options at

the jobsite during construction. After

construction is complete, employers

may store the documents offsite

provided they make them available to

an OSHA compliance officer on request.

These documents provide both the

employer and the compliance officer

with information needed to determine if

the selection and design of a protection

system are appropriate to the excavation

work, thereby assuring employees of

maximum protection against cave-ins.

II. Special Issues for Comment

OSHA has a particular interest in

comments on the following issues:

• Whether the proposed informationcollection requirements are necessary

for the proper performance of the

Agency’s functions, including whether

the information is useful;

• The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of

the burden (time and cost) of the

information-collection requirements,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

• The quality, utility, and clarity of

the information collected; and

• Ways to minimize the burden on

employers who must comply; for

example, by using automated or other

technological information-collection

and -transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

OSHA is requesting a decrease in the

existing burden-hour estimate for, as

well as an extension of OMB approval

of, the collection-of-information

requirements specified by the Standard.

Accordingly, the Agency is requesting to

decrease the current burden-hour

estimate from 20,080 hours to 20,011

hours, a total reduction of 69 hours.

This reduction occurred because OSHA

decreased the estimated number of

inspections that it will conduct during

each year covered by the ICR. The

Agency will summarize the comments

submitted in response to this notice,

and will include this summary in its

request to OMB to extend its approval

of these information-collection

requirements.

Type of Review: Extension of

currently approved informationcollection requirements.

Title: Excavations.

OMB Number: 1218–0137.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; not-for-profit institutions; Federal

government; State, local or tribal

governments.

Number of Respondents: 10,000.

Frequency of Response: Occasionally.

Average Time per Response: 2 hours

to obtain design information.

Estimated Total Burden Hours:

20,011.

Estimated Cost (Operation and

Maintenance): $405,563.

IV. Authority and Signature

R. Davis Layne, Acting Assistant

Secretary of Labor for Occupational

Safety and Health, directed the

preparation of this notice. The authority

for this notice is the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506)

and Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 3–

2000 (65 FR 50017).

Signed at Washington, DC on May 25,

2001.

R. Davis Layne,

Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 01–13689 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

[Docket No. ICR–1218–0207(2001)]

Welding, Cutting and Brazing;

Extension of the Office of Management

and Budget’s (OMB) Aproval of

Information-Collection (Paperwork)

Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of an opportunity for

public comment.

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments

concerning its request to decrease the

existing burden-hour estimates for, and

to extend OMB approval of, the

collection-of-information requirements

of 29 CFR 1910, Subpart Q (‘‘Welding,

Cutting and Brazing’’). This subpart

regulates the safety of employees who

operate electric or gas welding and

cutting equipment.

DATES: Submit written comments on or

before July 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

to the Docket Office, Docket No. ICR–

1218–0027–(2001), OSHA, U.S.

Department of Labor, Room N–2625,

200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)

693–2350. Commenters may transmit

written comments of 10 pages or less by

facsimile to (202) 693–1648.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Theda Kenney, Directorate of Safety

Standards Programs, OSHA, U.S.

Department of Labor, Room N–3609,

200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)

693–2222. A copy of the Agency’s

Information-Collection Request (ICR)

supporting the need for the information

collections contained in 29 CFR 1910,

subpart Q (‘‘Welding, Cutting and

Brazing’’) is available for inspection and

copying in the Docket Office or by

requesting a copy from Theda Kenney at

(202) 693–2222 or Todd Owen at (202)

693–2444. For electronic copies of the

ICR contact OSHA on the Internet at

http://www.osha.gov/comp-links.html,

and select ‘‘Information Collection

Requests.’’

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Department of Labor, as part of its

continuing effort to reduce paperwork

and respondent (i.e., employer) burden,

conducts a preclearance consultation

program to provide the public with an

opportunity to comment on proposed

and continuing information-collection

requirements in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This

program ensures that information is in

the desired format, reporting burden

(time and cost) is minimal, collection

instruments are understandable, and

OSHA’s estimate of the informationcollection burden is correct. The

Occupational Safety and Health Act of

the 1970 (the Act) authorizes

information collection by employers as

necessary or appropriate for

enforcement of the Act or for developing

information regarding the causes and

prevention of occupational injuries,

illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657).

After thoroughly reviewing the five

standards in 29 CFR 1910, subpart Q

(hereafter, ‘‘subpart Q’’), OSHA

identified a number of paperwork

requirements; however, it determined

that most of these requirements impose

no burden hours or costs on

29600 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Notices

respondents as specified by PRA–95. In

the following table, the Agency lists

these requirements and the rationale for

excluding them from the provisions of

PRA–95 regulating burden-hour and

cost determinations.

Paragraphs Paperwork requirement Rationale for exclusion

§ 1910.252 (‘‘General Requirements’’):

(a)(2)(iii)(B) .................................................. Train fire watchers to use fire extinguishers ... This training is performance-oriented and not

subject to PRA–95.

(a)(2)(xiii)(C) ................................................ Train cutters and welders and their supervisors in the safe operation of their equipment and the safe use of the process.This training is performance-oriented and not

subject to PRA–95.

(a)(2)(xiii)(D) ................................................ Advise contractors about flammable and hazardous conditions.This requirement was a usual and customary

business practice before OSHA adopted the

standard.

(a)(2)(xiv)(D) ................................................ Secure authorization for cutting and welding

operations from the designated management representative.

This requirement was a usual and customary

business practice prior to publication of the

standard.

(c)(1)(iv)(A)–(c)(1)(iv)(C) .............................. Use caution or warning labels ......................... The regulatory text provides the specific language for the labels.

(b)(2)(ii)(G) ................................................... Permanently and distinctively mark welding

lenses so that the source and shade are

readily identifiable.

Manufacturers and suppliers provide this service as a usual and customary business

practice.

§ 1910.253 (‘‘Oxygen-Fuel Gas Welding and

Cutting’’):

(a)(4) ............................................................ Instruct employees responsible for oxygen

and fuel-gas supply equipment in this important work before they assume this responsibility.

This training is performance-oriented and not

subject to PRA–95.

(a)(4) ............................................................ Make readily available the rules and instructions covering the operation and maintenance of oxygen and fuel-gas supply equipment.This requirement was a usual and customary

business practice before OSHA adopted the

standard.

(b)(1)(ii) ........................................................ Mark compressed-gas cylinders to identify

their gas contents.

Manufacturers and suppliers provide this service as a usual and customary business

practice.

(b)(5)(iii)(G), (c)(3)(v), (d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(iii),

(e)(6)(iii), (f)(1)(i), and (g)(1)(ii).

Provide warning tags on leaking cylinders;

post a sign at the manifold; mark aboveground piping systems; mark station outlets

with name of gas; mark gages on oxygen

regulators; mark generators with specified

information; and mark packages containing

calcium carbide.

The regulatory text provides the specific language for the labels.

(f)(7)(i)(A) ..................................................... Post operating instructions in a conspicuous

place near the generator or make them

readily available in a suitable location.

This requirement was a usual and customary

business practice before OSHA adopted the

standard.

§ 1910.254 (‘‘Arc Welding and Cutting’’):

(b)(4)(iv) ....................................................... Mark as grounded any dedicated welding lead

terminal connected to a grounded enclosure.

Manufacturers and suppliers provide this service as a usual and customary business

practice.

During its review of subpart Q, the

Agency found one paperwork

requirement needing OMB approval.

Accordingly, paragraph (e) of § 1910.255

(‘‘Resistance Welding’’) specifies that

employers must have qualified

maintenance personnel inspect

resistance welding equipment

periodically, and develop and maintain

a written certification record of each

inspection. The record must include the

date of the inspection, the signature of

the individual who performed the

inspection, and the serial number or

other identifier of the equipment

inspected. Developing and maintaining

a certification record notifies mechanics

of servicing or repair problems. In

addition, employers can review the

records to ensure that mechanics

performed the necessary repairs and

maintenance. The certification records

also provide the most efficient means

for an OSHA compliance officer to

determine that an employer performed

the required inspections and that the

equipment is safe. Accordingly, by

using equipment that is in safe

operating condition, employers will

prevent serious injury and death to the

equipment operators and other

employees who may be working near

the equipment.

II. Special Issues for Comment

OSHA has a particular interest in

comments on the following issues:

• Whether the proposed informationcollection requirements are necessary

for the proper performance of the

Agency’s functions, including whether

the information is useful;

• The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of

the burden (time and cost) of the

information-collection requirements,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

• The quality, utility, and clarity of

the information collected; and

• Ways to minimize the burden on

employers who must comply; for

example, by using automated or other

technological information-collection

and -transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

OSHA is requesting a decrease in the

existing burden-hour estimate for, as

well as an extension of OMB approval

of, the collection-of-information

requirements specified by subpart Q.

Accordingly, the Agency is requesting to

decrease the current burden-hour

estimate from 380,178 hours to 8,119

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Notices 29601

hours, a total reduction of 372,059

hours. This reduction occurred because

OSHA is removing the burden hours

previously attributed to the training

requirement specified in

§ 1918.252(a)(2)(xiii)(C); this training is

performance-oriented and, therefore, not

subject to PRA–95. The Agency will

summarize the comments submitted in

response to this notice, and will include

this summary in its request to OMB to

extend the approval of these

information-collected requirements.

Type of Review: Extension of

currently approved informationcollection requirements.

Title: Welding, Cutting and Brazing.

OMB Number: 1218–0207.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; not-for-profit institutions; Federal

government; State, local or tribal

governments.

Number of Respondents: 25,373.

Frequency of Response: Semiannually.

Average Time per Response: Varies

from 2 minutes (.03 hour) to develop an

inspection record to 5 minutes (.08

hour) to perform an inspection.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 8,119.

Estimated (Cost and Maintenance):

None.

IV. Authority and Signature

R. Davis Layne, Acting Assistant

Secretary of Labor for Occupational

Safety and Health, directed the

preparation of this notice. The authority

for this notice is the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506)

and Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 3–

2000 (65 FR 50017).

Signed at Washington, DC on May 25,

2001.

R. Davis Layne,

Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 01–13690 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

[Docket No. ICR–1218–0095(2001)]

Concrete and Masonry Construction;

Extension of the Office of Management

of Budget’s (OMB) Approval of

Information-Collection (Paperwork)

Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of an opportunity for

public comment.

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments

concerning its request to decrease the

existing burden-hour estimates for, and

to extend OMB approval of, the

collection-of-information requirements

of 29 CFR 1926, subpart Q (‘‘Concrete

and Masonry Construction’’). After a

thorough review of the paperwork

requirements specified by this subpart,

the Agency determined that none of

them results in burden hours or costs as

specified by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit written comments on or

before July 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

to the Docket Office, Docket No. ICR–

1218–0095(2001), OSHA, U.S.

Department of Labor, Room N–2625,

200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)

693–2350. Commenters may transmit

written comments of 10 pages or less by

facsimile to (202) 693–1648.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen M. Martinez, Directorate of

Policy, Office of Regulatory Analysis,

OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room

N–3609, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)

693–1953. A copy of the Agency’s

Information-Collection Request (‘‘ICR’’)

describing the information collections

specified by 29 CFR 1926, subpart Q is

available for inspection and copying in

the Docket Office or by requesting a

copy from Todd Owen at (202) 693–

2444. For electronic copies of the ICR

contact OSHA on the Internet at http:/

/www.osha.gov/comp-links.html and

select ‘‘Information Collection

Requests.’’

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Department of Labor, as part of its

continuing effort to reduce paperwork

and respondent (i.e., employer) burden,

conducts a preclearance consultation

program to provide the public with an

opportunity to comment on proposed

and continuing information-collection

requirements in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This

program ensures that information is in

the desired format, reporting burden

(time and cost) is minimal, collection

instruments are understandable, and

OSHA’s estimate of the informationcollection burden is correct.

After a thorough review of the seven

standards in 29 CFR 1926, subpart Q

(hereafter, ‘‘Subpart’’), OSHA identified

a number of paperwork requirements;

however, it determined that none of

these requirements impose burden

hours or costs on respondents as

specified by PRA–95. These

requirements, and the rationale for

excluding them from the provisions of

PRA–95 regulating burden-hour and

cost determinations, are:

• The warning signs specified for

post-tensioning areas by paragraph (c)(2)

of § 1926.701 (‘‘General Requirements’’),

and the requirements to lock-out and

tag-out ejection systems and other

hazardous equipment mandated by

paragraphs (a)(2), (j)(1), and (j)(2), of

§ 1926.702 (‘‘Requirements for

Equipment and Tools’’), because

paragraphs § 1926.701(c)(2) and

§ 1926.702(a)(2) imply the wording for

the required warning signs and ejectionsystem tags, while paragraph

§ 1926.702(j)(2) provides the exact

wording for the hazardous-equipment

tags;

• Paragraph (a)(2) of § 1926.703

(‘‘Requirements for Cast-in-Place

Concrete’’), which requires employers to

make available at the jobsite drawings or

plans for the jack layout, formwork

(including shoring equipment), working

decks, and scaffolds, as well as revisions

to these documents, because having

these drawings or plans available at the

jobsite is a usual and customary

business practice;

• Provisions in § 1926.703 addressing

shoring design (paragraph (b)(8)(i)) and

formwork-removal plans (paragraph

(e)(1)(i)) because these provisions are

part of the general design-and-planning

requirement of paragraph (a)(2);

• The designs and plans specified by

paragraph (a) of § 1926.705

(‘‘Requirements for Lift-Slab

Construction Operations’’) because

employers develop and use these

documents as a usual and customary

business practice; and

• Marking the rated capacity of jacks

and lifting units as required by

§ 1926.703 because the manufacturers

and suppliers of this equipment provide

this service as a usual and customary

practice.

The warning-signs required by

paragraph § 1926.701(c)(2) reduce

exposure of nonessential employees to

the hazards of post-tensioning

operations, principally a failed rope or

wire that could strike an employee and

cause serious injury. The requirements

to lock-out and tag-out ejection systems

and other hazardous equipment (e.g.,

compressors, mixers, screens or pumps

used for concrete and masonry

construction) specified by paragraphs

§ 1926.702(a)(2), (j)(1), and (j)(2) warn

equipment operators not to activate

their equipment if another employee

enters the equipment to perform a task

(e.g., cleaning, inspecting maintenance,

repairing), thereby preventing serious

injury or death.