Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 86 / Thursday, May 2, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 19547

securities are acquired to meet the 25

and 50-percent tests), but are not treated

as securities of an issuer for purposes of

the numerator of the 25 and 50-percent

tests. In addition, for a transfer of a

participating interest in a division of a

common trust fund not to be considered

an admission or withdrawal, each

participant’s pro rata interest in each of

the resulting common trust funds must

be substantially the same as was the

participant’s pro rata interest in the

dividing fund. However, in the case of

the division of a common trust fund

maintained by two or more banks that

are members of the same affiliated group

resulting from the termination of such

affiliation, the division will be treated as

meeting the requirements of the

preceding sentence if the written plans

of operation of the resulting common

trust funds are substantially identical to

the plan of operation of the dividing

common trust fund, each of the assets of

the dividing common trust fund are

distributed substantially pro rata to each

of the resulting common trust funds,

and each participant’s aggregate interest

in the assets of the resulting common

trust funds of which he or she is a

participant in substantially the same as

was the participant’s pro rata interest in

the assets of the dividing common trust

fund. The plan of operation of a

resulting common trust fund will not be

considered to be substantially identical

to that of the dividing common trust

fund where, for example, the plan of

operation of the resulting common trust

fund contains restrictions as to the types

of participants that may invest in the

common trust fund where such

restrictions were not present in the plan

of operation of the dividing common

trust fund.

* * * * *

(e) Effective date. The eighth sentence

of paragraph (a) of this section is

effective for combinations and divisions

of common trust funds completed on or

after May 2, 1996.

Margaret Milner Richardson,

Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Approved: March 6, 1996.

Leslie Samuels,

Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

[FR Doc. 96–10393 Filed 5–1–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

29 CFR Part 1910

[Docket No. S–060]

RIN 1218–AA71

Personal Protective Equipment for

General Industry

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA); Labor.

ACTION: Final rule; technical

amendment.

SUMMARY: The final rule on personal

protective equipment for general

industry was published by OSHA on

April 6, 1994 (59 FR 16334). In that rule,

the introductory phrase ‘‘the employer

shall ensure’’ was removed from various

proposed requirements for employees to

wear different types of protective

equipment (final rule §§ 1910.133,

1910.135, and 1910.136). The general

requirement for the employer to select

and have the employees wear

appropriate PPE, including any PPE

described in these specific provisions,

was retained in § 1910.132. The

employer’s obligation to assure

compliance with the individual

requirements for particular types of PPE

was intended to remain the same as if

the words ‘‘the employer shall ensure’’

or similar language were affixed to each

substantive PPE provision in the final

rule. However, OSHA’s compliance staff

has encountered difficulties in using

§§ 1910.133, 1910.135, and 1910.136

because they do not explicitly assign the

employer the responsibility for assuring

that employees wear the designated

equipment. Therefore, this technical

amendment is necessary to restate that

obligation within the text of these

requirements.

DATES: This amendment is effective June

3, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anne C. Cyr, Acting Director, Office of

Information and Consumer Affairs,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, U. S. Department of

Labor, Room N–3647, 200 Constitution

Ave., N. W., Washington, DC 20210.

Telephone: (202) 219–8151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OSHA’s

final rule on personal protective

equipment (PPE) for general industry

was published on April 6, 1994 (59 FR

16334), and became effective July 5,

1994. The PPE standards require the

employer to assure that each employee

wears appropriate equipment which

protects the eyes, head, feet, and hands,

from exposure to hazards in the

workplace. Section 1910.132 clearly

states that where such hazards are

present, or are likely to be present, the

employer has the obligation both to

select proper PPE and to require each

affected employee to wear it.

Sections 1910.133, 1910.135, and

1910.136 require that each affected

employee wear protective equipment for

the eyes and face, head, and feet,

respectively, when those parts of the

body are exposed to hazards. The

proposed version of each of those

sections was prefaced with the words

‘‘The employer shall ensure that’’ the

employees wear the equipment. In the

final rule, OSHA deleted the prefatory

language in response to various

comments. The preamble to the final

rule made clear that in making these

deletions, the Agency intended to make

no change in the substantive

requirements between the proposed and

final rules. That is, the employer was to

be obligated to require the employee to

wear eye, face, head and foot protection

under §§ 1910.133, 1910.135, and

1910.136, regardless of whether the

words ‘‘the employer shall ensure’’ were

included in those standards. (see final

rule preamble, 59 FR at 16335.)

The reason for the language change

from the proposal was concern by some

commenters that the proposed language

would result in their being held liable

for violations of these standards,

regardless of any exculpatory

considerations such as employee

misconduct. In making the changes,

OSHA emphasized two points: first, that

the proposed language would not have

affected an employer’s ability to raise

defenses to a citation; and second, that

it was the Agency’s intention that the

employer’s obligations for compliance

with standards issued under the OSH

Act be unaffected by the changes from

the proposed rule to the final rule.

Since the final rule was issued, the

revised language has caused difficulty

for OSHA’s compliance staff with regard

to the employer’s obligation to have

employees wear PPE. That obligation,

while specifically stated under

§ 1910.132 for all PPE, is not explicitly

spelled out in the specific provisions of

§§ 1910.133, 1910.135 and 1910.136, for

eye and head, face, and foot protection,

even though it was the Agency’s clearly

stated intention that the obligation

apply there, as well. Accordingly,

OSHA has determined that it is

necessary to make a technical

amendment to those three sections, to

bring them into line with the stated

intention of the Agency in the preamble

to the final rule.
19548 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 86 / Thursday, May 2, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

The current language of §§ 1910.133,

1910.135, and 1910.136 contains

requirements that employees wear the

particular PPE addressed by those

sections. However, there is no specific

text in any of these sections that directly

addresses the employer and the

employer’s responsibilities for

compliance. OSHA compliance staff

have dealt with this situation to date by

grouping their citations for violations of

§§ 1910.133, 1910.135, and 1910.136

with their citation under the general

PPE requirement in § 1910.132. Each of

these provisions was intended in the

final rule to stand on its own, and the

Agency has determined that a technical

amendment is necessary to correct the

problem.

This technical amendment inserts

appropriate language into §§ 1910.133,

1910.135, and 1910.136 which states the

employer’s obligation to ensure that

each affected employee wears the

specified types of PPE under these

sections as well as under § 1910.132,

where the employer’s responsibility in

this area is already spelled out. It should

also be noted that this technical

amendment does not prevent the

employer who is cited for a PPE

violation from raising any affirmative

defenses which would otherwise be

applicable.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553 and 29 CFR

1911.5, this constitutes a minor rule

change which does not require public

notice and comment. As noted above, it

clarifies an obligation under the specific

PPE standards which already applies to

employers under the general rule in

§ 1910.132, and implements

determinations already made by the

Agency in the preamble to the final rule.

Accordingly, further public

participation is not required. However,

in order to allow enough time for

information on the technical

amendment to be distributed and

implemented by employers, OSHA is

making the amendment effective June 3,

1996.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910

Eye protection; Face protection; Foot

Protection; Hand protection; Footwear;

Hard hats; Head protection;

Occupational safety and health;

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration; Personal protective

equipment; Safety glasses; Safety shoes.

Authority

This document has been prepared

under the direction of Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor for

Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 4, 6

and 8 of the Occupational Safety and

Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,

657); 5 U.S.C. 553; Secretary of Labor’s

Order No. 1–90 (55 FR 9033), and 29

CFR Part 1911, 29 CFR part 1910 is

amended as set forth below.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 15th day

of April, 1996.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

PART 1910—[AMENDED]

Subpart I—Personal Protective

Equipment

1. The authority citation for subpart I

of part 1910 is revised to read as

follows:

Authority: Sections 4, 6 and 8,

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970

(29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s

Order No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR

25059), 9–83 (48 FR 35736), or 1–90 (55 FR

9033), as applicable.

Sections 1910.132, and 1910.138 also

issued under 29 CFR part 1911.

Sections 1910.133, 1910.135, and 1910.136

also issued under 29 CFR part 1911 and 5

U.S.C. 553.

§ 1910.133 [Amended]

2. Paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5) of

§ 1910.133 are amended by replacing

the words ‘‘Each affected employee

shall use’’ with the words ‘‘The

employer shall ensure that each affected

employee uses’’.

§ 1910.133 [Amended]

3. Paragraph (a)(3) of § 1910.133 is

amended by removing the word ‘‘Each’’,

adding the words ‘‘The employer shall

ensure that each’’ in its place at the

beginning of the paragraph, and by

replacing the words ‘‘shall wear’’ with

‘‘wears’’ both places they appear in the

paragraph.

§ 1910.135 [Amended]

4. Paragraph (a)(1) of § 1910.135 is

amended by replacing the words ‘‘Each

affected employee shall wear protective

helmets’’ with the words ‘‘The employer

shall ensure that each affected employee

wears a protective helmet’’.

§ 1910.135 [Amended]

5. Paragraph (a)(2) of § 1910.135 is

amended by replacing the words

‘‘Protective helmets’’ with the words

‘‘The employer shall ensure that a

protective helmet’’, and by replacing the

words ‘‘shall be worn ’’ with the words

‘‘is worn.’’

§ 1910.136 [Amended]

6. Paragraph (a) of § 1910.136 is

amended by replacing the words ‘‘Each

affected employee shall wear’’ with the

words ‘‘the employer shall ensure that

each affected employee used.’’

[FR Doc. 96–10433 Filed 5–1–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development

Corporation

33 CFR Part 401

RIN 2135–AA00

Seaway Regulations and Rules:

Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Saint Lawrence Seaway

Development Corporation, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Saint Lawrence Seaway

Development Corporation and the St.

Lawrence Seaway Authority of Canada

publish joint Seaway Regulations. As a

result of discussions with the Authority,

it has been determined that a number of

existing regulations need to be amended

for clarification or simplification. In

addition, several substantive changes

are being made, specifically: changing

the maximum allowable beam from

23.16 m (76 feet) to 23.8 m (78 feet),

with certain, practical conditions

applied; reducing the security deposit

for certain vessels; requiring permanent

fenders, with a phase-in period; and

reducing some of the system’s speed

limits. The first two of these are

intended to encourage increased usage

of the Seaway, the third is intended to

increase the safety for both the

Corporation’s and the Authority’s locks

and the vessels transiting, and the

fourth is intended to increase both

safety and environmental protection.

DATES: This rule is effective on June 3,

1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marc C. Owen, Chief Counsel, Saint

Lawrence Seaway Development

Corporation, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366–

6823.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As a result

of discussions with the Saint Lawrence

Seaway Authority of Canada, the Saint

Lawrence Seaway Development

Corporation is amending the Seaway

Regulations and Rules in 33 CFR Part

401 as described in the following

summary.

Section 401.3, ‘‘Maximum vessel

dimensions’’, is amended by revising

paragraph (a), removing paragraph

(d)(1), and adding a new paragraph (e)

to change the maximum allowable beam

from 23.16 m (76 feet) to 23.8 m (78 feet)