12416 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine Livingston Fernandez at (202)

622–4606 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The final regulations that are the

subject of these corrections are under

sections 401(a)(30), 401(k), 401(m),

402(a)(8), 402(g), 411(d)(6), 415(c), 416

and 4979 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

As published, TD 8581 contains

typographical errors that are in need of

correction.

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication of the

final regulations which is the subject of

FR Doc. 94–31427, is corrected as

follows:

1. On page 66165, column 2, in the

preamble following the paragraph

heading ‘‘1. Coordination With

Regulations Under Sections 401(a)(4),

401(a)(17), 410(b), and 414(s)’’,

paragraph 2, line 10, the section

‘‘410(k)’’ is corrected to read ‘‘401(k)’’.

§ 1.401(k)–1 [Corrected]

2. On page 66173, column 2,

§ 1.401(k)–1, paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C), line

11, the regulations section ‘‘§ 410(b)–

7(c)’’ is corrected to read ‘‘§ 1.410(b)–

7(c)’’.

§ 1.401(m)–1 [Corrected]

3. On page 66178, column 1,

§ 1.401(m)–1, paragraph (e)(6), Example

3., third line from the bottom of the

paragraph, the language ‘‘in

compensation). Since Plan X satisfies

the’’ is corrected to read ‘‘in

compensation. Since Plan X satisfies

the’’.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,

Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief

Counsel (Corporate).

[FR Doc. 95–5552 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

29 CFR Part 1952

North Carolina State Plan; Suspension

of Limited Concurrent Federal

Enforcement

AGENCY: Department of Labor,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA).

ACTION: Final rule; notice of suspension

of concurrent Federal enforcement.

SUMMARY: This document announces

OSHA’s suspension of its exercise of

concurrent Federal enforcement

authority in North Carolina. Federal

enforcement authority will be exercised

only with regard to those issues not

covered by the State plan and in specific

areas defined in this document under

‘‘Level of Federal Enforcement.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Liblong, Director, Office of

Information and Consumer Affairs,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, U.S. Department of

Labor, room N3647, 200 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210,

(202) 219–8148.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

Section 18 of the Occupational Safety

and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 667,

provides that States which wish to

assume responsibility for developing

and enforcing their own occupational

safety and health standards, may do so

by submitting, and obtaining Federal

approval of, a State plan. State plan

approval occurs in stages which include

initial approval under section 18(b) of

the Act and, ultimately, final approval

under section 18(e). In the interim,

between initial approval and final

approval, there is a period of concurrent

Federal/State jurisdiction within a State

operating an approved plan. See 29 CFR

1954.3 for guidelines and procedures.

The North Carolina Occupational

Safety and Health Plan was approved

under section 18(c) of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.

667(c)) (hereinafter referred to as the

Act) and part 1902 of this chapter on

January 26, 1973 (38 FR 3041), and

certified by OSHA as having completed

all of its developmental steps on

October 5, 1976 (41 FR 43896). On

February 20, 1975, OSHA and the State

of North Carolina entered into an

Operational Status Agreement which

suspended the exercise of Federal

concurrent enforcement authority in all

except specifically identified areas. (See

40 FR 16843).

On September 3, 1991, a tragic fire

occurred at the Imperial Food Products

chicken processing plant in Hamlet,

North Carolina, which resulted in the

deaths of 25 workers. In response to that

event OSHA understood a

comprehensive reevaluation of the

performance of the North Carolina State

Plan and a special evaluation of all

other State Plans. On October 24, 1991

(56 FR 55192) OSHA reasserted

concurrent Federal enforcement

jurisdiction in North Carolina with

respect to all currently pending and new

complaints of discrimination filed either

with OSHA or the State; all complaints

of unsafe or unhealthful working

conditions brought to OSHA’s attention

on or after October 24, 1991 by

employees or referred by others; and

referrals from the North Carolina

Governor’s 800 ‘‘Safety Line’’. This

action was responsive to the State’s

request for assistance. Upon further

request, on March 31, 1992, (57 FR

10820) OSHA extended its jurisdiction

to include all as yet uninvestigated

workplace complaints filed with the

State as of March 20, 1992.

Congressional oversight hearings were

held on the Hamlet fire and the AFL–

CIO, on September 11, 1991, petitioned

the Assistant Secretary to withdraw

approval of the North Carolina State

Plan. (See September 30, 1991, 56 FR

49444, Request for Public Comment and

January 16, 1992, 57 FR 1889, extension

of the comment period and

announcement of the availability of a

Special Evaluation report on North

Carolina.) On January 7, 1992, OSHA

issued a Special Evaluation report on

North Carolina finding significant

deficiencies and giving the State 90 days

to take corrective action. On April 23,

1992, OSHA determined that the State’s

response to the Special Evaluation

findings was insufficient and gave North

Carolina 45 days to show cause why

plan withdrawal action should not be

initiated. Fully satisfactory assurances

the necessary corrective action would be

undertaken were received in June 1992.

Since that date, North Carolina has

made substantive and significant

modifications to its program. Major

modifications were made to the State’s

occupational safety and health program

enabling legislation; State funding and

staffing were increased. The State now

has the inspection resources necessary

to provide effective worker protection in

the State and has addressed all of the

deficiencies identified as a result of

OSHA’s 1991 Special Evaluation Report.

The State increased its allocated

enforcement staff to 115 (64 safety and

51 health) and trained its new

compliance officers in accord with the

schedule outlined in the State’s June

1992 corrective action commitments.

(On-board compliance staffing totals

104—61 safety and 43 health as of

February 1, 1995.) North Carolina

resumed responsibility for all

discrimination complaints effective July

1, 1992, as a result of enactment of

legislation creating the Workplace

Retaliatory Discrimination (WORD)

Division, selection and training of

dedicated staff, and revision of its

discrimination manual to be comparable
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12417

to OSHA’s. The State has no appreciable

backlog of workplace complaints and is

conducting programmed inspection.

These and others actions have also

resolved all issues raised in the AFL–

CIO’s petition for withdrawal of

approval of the North Carolina State

Plan.

OSHA has issued three evaluation

reports on North Carolina’s performance

since the Special Evaluation. All have

documented continuing improvement

and indicate that the program is now

operating in a more than acceptable

manner with an outstanding

commitment to necessary enforcement

as well as creative outreach and other

voluntary compliance activities.

As a result of these actions, OSHA

was prepared to suspend its exercise of

concurrent Federal jurisdiction in North

Carolina by mid-1994. However, two

initiatives that the State had undertaken

were brought to OSHA’s attention as

potential problems—the conditions

attendant to the establishment of a joint

Ergonomics Center with North Carolina

State University; and an amendment to

State law establishing a two-step contest

procedure as a means of expediting

review of contested cases and achieving

more timely abatement of hazards. Both

of these issues have now been resolved.

The ergonomics program has been

revised to eliminate any possibility or

perception that inspection or citation

exemption could result from employer

participation in the Ergonomics Center

program. The informal conference

procedures have been revised through

an internal operating procedure and a

proposed regulation to specify that any

informal conference resulting from the

contest process must be held within 20

days.

B. Decision

Based on the foregoing, OSHA has

determined that the exercise of

concurrent Federal enforcement

jurisdiction is no longer warranted, and

it is hereby suspended. Federal

enforcement authority will be exercised

only with regard to those issues not

covered by the State and in specific

areas defined in the following

modification to 29 CFR 1952.155 ‘‘Level

of Federal Enforcement.’’

OSHA has similarly determined that

no further action is necessary or

appropriate with regard to the AFL–CIO

petition for North Carolina plan

withdrawal. This does not preclude the

resubmission of a petition at any time

on substantive issues of State Plan

structure or performance.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1952

Intergovernmental relations, Law

enforcement, Occupational safety and

health.

Accordingly, 29 CFR 1952.155 is

amended as set forth below.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 28th day of

February 1995.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary.

PART 1952—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 29 CFR

part 1952 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 18, 84 Stat. 1608 (29 U.S.C.

667); 29 CFR part 1902, Secretary of Labor’s

Order No. 1–90 (55 FR 9033).

2. Section 1952.155 of part 1952,

subpart I—North Carolina is revised to

read as follows:

Subpart I—North Carolina

§ 1952.155 Level of Federal enforcement.

Pursuant to § 1902.20(b)(1)(iii),

discretionary Federal enforcement

authority under Section 18(e) of the Act

(29 U.S.C. 667(e)) will not be initiated

with regard to Federal occupational

safety and health standards in issues

covered under 29 CFR part 1910, 29

CFR part 1926, and 29 CFR part 1928.

The U.S. Department of Labor will

continue to exercise authority, among

other things, with regard to: complaints

filed with the U.S. Department of Labor

alleging discrimination under Section

11(c) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 660(c));

enforcement with respect to private

sector maritime activities, including

enforcement of all provisions of the Act,

rules or orders and all Federal

standards, current or future, applicable

to private sector maritime employment

including 29 CFR part 1915, shipyard

employment (including boat building

establishments in SIC 3732 located on

the navigable waters and all

establishments in SIC 3731); 29 CFR

part 1917, marine terminals; 29 CFR

part 1918, longshoring (including all

private sector and Federal sector marine

cargo handling establishments or

operations in SIC 4491 located within

the State of North Carolina), 29 CFR part

1919, gear certification; all marinas in

SIC 4493 located on the navigable

waters; enforcement of marine

construction activities on the navigable

waters which are not directly accessible

by land; and, enforcement of general

industry and construction standards (29

CFR parts 1910 and 1926) appropriate to

hazards found in these employments,

which issues have been specifically

excluded from coverage in the North

Carolina plan; the enforcement of

occupational safety and health

standards on Indian reservations;

enforcement relating to any contractors

or subcontractors on any Federal

establishment where the land has been

ceded to the Federal Government;

enforcement on military bases;

enforcement of new Federal standards

until the State adopts a comparable

standard; situations where the State is

refused entry and is unable to obtain a

warrant or enforce the right of entry;

enforcement of unique and complex

standards as determined by the

Assistant Secretary; enforcement in

situations where the State is temporarily

unable to exercise its enforcement

authority fully or effectively;

completion of enforcement actions

initiated prior to the effective date of

this notice; and investigations for the

purpose of the evaluation of the North

Carolina plan under sections 18 (e) and

(f) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 667 (e) and (f)).

The Regional Administrator for

Occupational Safety and Health will

make a prompt recommendation for the

resumption of the exercise of Federal

enforcement authority under section

18(e) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 667(e))

whenever, and to the degree, necessary

to assure occupational safety and health

protection to employees in North

Carolina.

[FR Doc. 95–5504 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–M

29 CFR Part 1952

Approved State Plans for Enforcement

of State Standards; Approval of

Supplements to the Hawaii State Plan

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Approval of supplements to the

Hawaii State Plan.

SUMMARY: This document gives notice of

Federal approval of supplements to the

Hawaii State occupational safety and

health plan. These supplements are:

regulations concerning the Division of

Occupational Safety and Health’s

Access to Employee Medical Records;

changes to previously approved

regulations covering the Labor and

Industrial Relations Appeals, Board,

General Provisions and Definitions,

Recording and Reporting Occupational

Injuries and Illnesses, Inspections,

Citations, and Proposed Penalties, and

Variances; an amendment to the Hawaii

Occupational Safety and Health Law

enacted in 1987; the Hawaii

Consultation Policies and Procedures

Manual; and the Hawaii Occupational