Source: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/federalregister/2000-04-24
Timestamp: 2020-06-05 10:59:53
Document Index: 244903750

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1926', 'arts 1917', 'art 1915', 'art 1915', 'art 1910', 'art 1926', 'art 1915', 'art 1926', 'art 1910', 'ART 1926', 'ARTS 1917', 'ART 1915', 'ART 1915', 'art 1915', 'ART 1910', 'ART 1926', 'ART 1915', 'ART 1926']

65:23019-23081
is on pages 23019-23081
1935 Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals 1218-AB63
1936 Safety Standards for Scaffolds Used in the Construction Industry -- Part II 1218-AB68
1937 Grain Handling Facilities (Section 610 Review) 1218-AB73
1938 Cotton Dust (Section 610 Review) 1218-AB74
1939 Prevention of Needlestick and Other Sharps Injuries 1218-AB85
1940 Occupational Exposure to Perchloroethylene 1218-AB86
1941 Sanitation 1218-AB87
1942 Hearing Loss Prevention in Construction Workers 1218-AB89
1943 Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) for Air Contaminants 1218-AB54
1944 Occupational Exposure to Ethylene Oxide (Section 610 Review) 1218-AB60
1945 Plain Language Revision of the Flammable and Combustible Liquids Standard 1218-AB61
1946 Plain Language Revision of the Mechanical Power-Transmission Apparatus Standard 1218-AB66
1947 Electric Power Transmission and Distribution; Electrical Protective Equipment in the Construction Industry 1218-AB67
1948 Standards Improvement (Miscellaneous Changes) for General Industry, Marine Terminals, and Construction Standards (Phase II) 1218-AB81
1949 Plain Language Revisions to Spray Applications 1218-AB84
1950 Signs, Signals, and Barricades 1218-AB88
1951 Steel Erection (Part 1926) (Safety Protection for Ironworkers) 1218-AA65
1952 Recording and Reporting Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (Simplified Injury/Illness Recordkeeping Requirements) 1218-AB24
1953 Ergonomics Programs: Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders 1218-AB36
1954 Occupational Exposure to Tuberculosis 1218-AB46
1955 Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories Programs: Fees 1218-AB57
1956 Employer Payment for Personal Protective Equipment 1218-AB77
1957 Consultation Agreements 1218-AB79
1958 Plain Language Revisions to the Exit Routes Standard 1218-AB82
1959 Respiratory Protection (Proper Use of Modern Respirators) 1218-AA05
1960 Longshoring and Marine Terminals (Parts 1917 and 1918) -- Reopening of the Record (Vertical Tandem Lifts (VTLs)) 1218-AA56
1961 Scaffolds in Shipyards (Part 1915 -- Subpart N) 1218-AA68
1962 Access and Egress in Shipyards (Part 1915, Subpart E) (Shipyards: Emergency Exits and Aisles) 1218-AA70
1963 Glycol Ethers: 2-Methoxyethanol, 2-Ethoxyethanol, and Their Acetates: Protecting Reproductive Health 1218-AA84
1964 Accreditation of Training Programs for Hazardous Waste Operations (Part 1910) 1218-AB27
1965 Indoor Air Quality in the Workplace 1218-AB37
1966 Safety and Health Programs (for General Industry and the Maritime Industries) 1218-AB41
1967 Occupational Exposure to Hexavalent Chromium (Preventing Occupational Illness: Chromium) 1218-AB45
1968 Confined Spaces in Construction (Part 1926): Preventing Suffocation/Explosions in Confined Spaces 1218-AB47
1969 General Working Conditions for Shipyard Employment 1218-AB50
1970 Fire Protection in Shipyard Employment (Part 1915, Subpart P) (Shipyards: Fire Safety) 1218-AB51
1971 Metalworking Fluids: Protecting Respiratory Health 1218-AB58
1972 Fall Protection in the Construction Industry 1218-AB62
1973 Revocation of Certification Records for Tests, Inspections, and Training 1218-AB65
1974 Safety and Health Programs for Construction 1218-AB69
1975 Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica 1218-AB70
1976 Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout) in Construction (Part 1926) (Preventing Construction Injuries/Fatalities: Lockout) 1218-AB71
1977 Occupational Exposure to Beryllium 1218-AB76
1978 Consolidation of Records Maintenance Requirements in OSHA Standards 1218-AB78
1979 Walking Working Surfaces and Personal Fall Protection Systems (1910) (Slips, Trips and Fall Prevention) 1218-AB80
1980 Oil and Gas Well Drilling and Servicing 1218-AB83
1981 Control of Hazardous Energy Sources (Lockout/Tagout) 1218-AB59
1935. PROCESS SAFETY MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS
Legal Deadline:None
Abstract: OSHA is undertaking two regulatory actions concerning the Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (PSM) standard. One action was to publish, in April, 2000, an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to address the need to add reactive chemicals that are not currently covered by PSM to the rule and the need to revise the language of the rule to clarify OSHA's intent to cover flammable liquids stored in atmospheric tanks that are connected to a process. Another action is a proposal to add chemicals to the list of highly hazardous chemicals in the PSM standard that were not originally included in the OSHA standard but were included in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Risk Management Program (RMP) rule (one part of the RMP rule addresses compliance with the OSHA Process Safety Management rule). OSHA has been asked by representatives of the regulated community to bring its chemical list into closer alignment with the RMP rule.
ANPRM Reactives 04/00/00
Marthe B. Kent, Acting Director, Directorate of Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N3718, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210
1936. SAFETY STANDARDS FOR SCAFFOLDS USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY -- PART II
Abstract: Since the promulgation of a final rule for scaffolds used in construction in August 1996, several issues have arisen under the new standard. The agency will solicit information on several issues including (1) providing access to platforms where decking extends past the ends of the scaffold; (2) changing the minimum width for roof brackets to less than 12 inches; (3) changing the requirements for grounding of the scaffold during welding operations; and (4) requiring the use of scaffold grade planks.
ANPRM 09/00/00
1937. GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES (SECTION 610 REVIEW)
End Review 01/00/01
1938. COTTON DUST (SECTION 610 REVIEW)
End Review 09/00/00
1939. PREVENTION OF NEEDLESTICK AND OTHER SHARPS INJURIES
Abstract: In 1998, OSHA published a Request for Information (RFI) requesting information from the public on the incidence of needlestick and sharps injuries among workers in healthcare, nursing home, and other related work settings; the availability and extent of use of safer medical devices to prevent such injuries; the potential cost and feasibility implications of relying on such devices; how best to evaluate the efficacy of these devices and encourage worker acceptance of them, and other issues. Workers receiving such injuries may contract such deadly diseases as Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) if the needle or sharp causing the injury is contaminated by blood or other potentially infectious material from a patient or client with bloodborne disease. OSHA received 396 responses to the RFI. It has been estimated that there are 590,000 contaminated needlestick and sharps injuries every year. OSHA decided to take several actions in response to the information received: issuance of the RFI summary report; revision of the compliance directive (CPL 2- 2.44D) for the Bloodborne Pathogens standard (29 CFR 1910.1030); and proposed revision of the Bloodborne Pathogens standard to clarify that, where feasible, safer medical devices must be used to satisfy the requirements of that paragraph: "Engineering and work practice controls shall be used to eliminate or minimize employee exposure." The revised compliance directive was issued in 1999. OSHA intends to issue the proposed rule in the Spring of 2001, and to hold stakeholder meetings in the summer of 2000.
ANPRM 03/00/01
1940. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO PERCHLOROETHYLENE
Abstract: OSHA intends to issue an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) to address the hazards associated with occupational exposure to perchloroethylene (also called "tetrachloroethylene"), (CAS 127-18-4). OSHA's limits for this substance are 100 ppm as an 8- hour TWA; 200 ppm as a 15-minute ceiling; and 300 ppm as a 5-minute peak not to be exceeded in any 3-hour period (29 CFR 1910.1000). These limits have been in place for nearly 30 years and are widely recognized as being inadequately protective. NIOSH classifies perchloroethylene as an occupational carcinogen. Workers exposed to perchloroethylene may experience sensory irritation, narcosis, liver damage, and cancer. The ANPR will solicit information from interested parties on the risk, current exposure levels, current industry control practices, and feasible means of achieving reductions in existing exposure levels among workers in perchloroethylene-using industries.
ANPRM 05/00/00
1941. SANITATION
Abstract: On October 7, 1998, the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health(ACCSH) recommended that OSHA consider proposed revisions to the construction sanitation standard (29 CFR 1926.51). OSHA believes that the ACCSH recommendation raises important issues regarding the type of sanitation facilities needed for construction workers. OSHA intends to issue an ANPRM to consider revisions to the sanitation standard that would include washing facilities, gender- separate and lockable toilet facilities, and (where other OSHA standards require change rooms), gender-separate and lockable change facilities.
ANPRM 12/00/00
1942. HEARING LOSS PREVENTION IN CONSTRUCTION WORKERS
Abstract: OSHA issued a Sec. 6(b)(5) health standard mandating a comprehensive hearing conservation program for noise exposed workers in general industry in 1983. However, a number of recent studies have shown that a large number of construction workers experience work- related hearing loss. In addition, current industry practice with regard to the use of engineering, administrative and personal protective equipment to reduce exposures to noise is low in this industry. OSHA intends to issue an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) early in 2000, and to initiate stakeholder meetings later in the year, to gather information on the extent of noise-induced hearing loss among workers in different trades in this industry, current practices to reduce this loss, and additional approaches and protections that could be used to prevent such loss in the future.
ANPRM 04/00/00
1943. PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE LIMITS (PELS) FOR AIR CONTAMINANTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801. Unfunded Mandates: This action may affect the private sector under PL 104-4.
Abstract: OSHA enforces hundreds of permissible exposure limits (PELs) for toxic air contaminants found in U.S. workplaces. Most of the air contaminant limits were adopted by OSHA in 1971 from recommendations issued by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists and the American National Standards Institute. These PELs, which have not been updated since 1971, thus reflect the results of research conducted in the 1950s and 1960s. Since then, much new information has become available that indicates that, in many cases, these early limits are outdated and insufficiently protective of worker health. To correct this situation, OSHA issued a final rule in 1989 (54 FR 2332); it lowered the existing PELs for 212 toxic air contaminants and established PELs for 164 previously unregulated air contaminants. On June 12, 1992 (57 FR 26001), OSHA proposed a rule that would have extended these limits to workplaces in the construction, maritime, and agriculture industries. However, on July 10, 1992, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the 1989 final rule on the grounds that "(1) OSHA failed to establish that existing exposure limits in the workplace presented significant risk of material health impairment or that new standards eliminated or substantially lessened the risk; (2) OSHA did not meet its burden of establishing that its 428 new permissible exposure limits (PELs) were either economically or technologically feasible." The Court's decision forced the Agency to return to the earlier, insufficiently protective limits.
OSHA continues to believe that establishing a rulemaking approach that will permit the Agency to update existing air contaminant limits and establish new ones as toxicological evidence of the need to do so becomes available is a high priority. The rulemaking described in this Regulatory Plan entry reflects OSHA's intention to move forward with this process. In determining how to proceed, OSHA is being guided by the OSH Act and the Eleventh District Court decision regarding quantifying the risk and analyzing the feasibility of any new air contaminant limits. State-of-the-art risk assessment methodologies will be utilized for both carcinogens and noncarcinogens, and the determinations of feasibility contained in the economic analysis accompanying the proposal will be extensive. OSHA published (61 FR 1947) the name of the 20 substances from which the proposed new PELs for the first update were chosen: carbon disulfide, carbon monoxide, chloroform, dimethyl sulfate, epichlorohydrin, ethylene dichloride, glutaraldehyde, n-hexane, 2-hexanone, hydrazine, hydrogen sulfide, manganese and compounds, mercury and compounds, nitrogen dioxide, perchloroethylene, sulfur dioxide, toluene, toluene diisocyanate, trimellitic anhydride, and vinyl bromide. The specific hazards associated with the air contaminants preliminarily selected for regulation include cancer, neurotoxicity, respiratory and skin irritation and sensitivity, and cardiovascular disease, etc. Using the same criteria as those used in the Priority Planning Process, OSHA has evaluated for each substance: the severity of the health effect, the number of exposed workers, toxicity of the substance, uses and prevailing exposure levels of the substance, the potential risk reduction, and the availability and quality of information useful in quantitative risk assessment to ensure that significant risks are addressed and that workers will experience substantial benefits in the form of enhanced health and safety.
Although OSHA has evaluated factors for the twenty substances and plans to develop more PELs in the future, for this first stage in the current rulemaking process OSHA has decided to propose new PELs for four chemicals - carbon disulfide, glutaraldehyde, hydrazine, and trimellitic anhydride - that have different adverse health effects, both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic, requiring different risk assessment approaches. For these four chemicals, OSHA has modified or developed new quantitative risk assessment approaches for cancer, respiratory sensitization and irritation, cardiovascular disease and neurotoxicity effects. Publication of the proposal will allow OSHA to continue to develop a mechanism for updating and extending its air contaminant limits, that will, at the same time, provide added protection to many workers who are currently being overexposed to toxic substances in the workplace.
OSHA is also considering supplemental mechanisms proposed by stakeholders to increase the effectiveness and timeliness of the process. The agency is considering the establishment of an advisory committee to review issues related to the PELs process.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for the proposed PELs for selected air contaminants is a preliminary determination by the Secretary of Labor that the substances for which PELs are being proposed pose a significant risk to workers and that the new limits will substantially reduce that risk.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The scope of the proposed rule is currently under development and thus quantitative estimates of costs and benefits have not been determined at this time. Implementation costs associated with the proposed standard include primarily those related to identifying and correcting overexposures using engineering controls and work practices. Additional costs may be incurred for the implementation of administrative controls and the purchase and use of personal protective equipment. Estimates of the magnitude of the problem of occupational illnesses, both acute and chronic, vary considerably. In 1989, OSHA concluded that its Air Contaminants rule in general industry, which lowered 212 exposure limits and added 164 where none had previously existed, would result in a reduction of approximately 700 deaths, 55,000 illnesses, and over 23,300 lost- workday illnesses annually. Chronic effects include cardiovascular disease, respiratory, liver and kidney disease, reproductive effects, neurological damage, and cancer. Acute effects include respiratory and sensory irritation, chemical burns, and ocular effects.
Risks: Risk assessments for the substances under consideration for this first phase of the air contaminants updating and revision process are being completed at this time.
NPRM 08/00/00
1944. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO ETHYLENE OXIDE (SECTION 610 REVIEW)
Abstract: OSHA has undertaken a review of the ethylene oxide (ETO) standard in accordance with the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and section 5 of EO 12866. The review has considered the continued need for the rule, the impacts of the rule, comments on the rule received from the public, the complexity of the rule, whether the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal, State or local regulations, and the degree to which technology, economic conditions or other factors may have changed since the rule was last evaluated. The Agency's findings with respect to this review will be published in a report available to the public in 2000.
Publish Report 06/00/00
1945. PLAIN LANGUAGE REVISION OF THE FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS STANDARD
Abstract: This project responds to the President's Executive Memo of June 1998 regarding the use of plain language in Federal regulations. With this project, OSHA is initiating rulemaking that will revise the regulations contained in 29 CFR 1910.106 addressing flammable and combustible liquids storage. The purpose of this rulemaking will be to restate this standard in plain language.
NPRM Reactives 12/00/00
1946. PLAIN LANGUAGE REVISION OF THE MECHANICAL POWER-TRANSMISSION APPARATUS STANDARD
Abstract: OSHA has identified this standard in part 1910 for revision as part of the President's initiative on Federal regulations discussed in the U.S. Department of Labor Report of June 15, 1995 and to respond to the President's June 1998 Executive Memo on Plain Language. OSHA intends to propose a plain language revision of the rule.
NPRM - Mechanical Power-Transmission Apparatus 06/00/00
1947. ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION; ELECTRICAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
1948. STANDARDS IMPROVEMENT (MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES) FOR GENERAL INDUSTRY, MARINE TERMINALS, AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (PHASE II)
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.142; 29 CFR 1910.178; 29 CFR 1910.219; 29 CFR 1910.261; 29 CFR 1910.265; 29 CFR 1910.410; 29 CFR 1910.1001-.1052; 29 CFR 1926.60; 29 CFR 1926.62; 29 CFR 1926.1101; 29 CFR 1926.1127; 29 CFR 1926.1129; 29 CFR 1917.92
NPRM 05/00/00
1949. PLAIN LANGUAGE REVISIONS TO SPRAY APPLICATIONS
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.107; 29 CFR 1910.94(c), (d)
Abstract: This plain language effort will revise one of OSHA's most complex and out-of-date rules, those for spray finishing using flammable and combustible liquids (29 CFR 1010.107). This standard addresses the hazards associated with the use of spray areas or spray booths to apply flammable or combustible liquids to manufactured equipment and objects. It includes specifications for the design of spray booths and areas, and for the use of these booths and areas and associated equipment. The plain language rule will be titled "Spray Applications. This rule was originally listed under RIN:1218-AB55.
1950. SIGNS, SIGNALS, AND BARRICADES
Abstract: OSHA's standard on Signs, Signals and Barricades (Subpart G- 29 CFR 1926.200 through 1926.203) currently incorporates the American National Standards Institute's 1971 industry consensus standard ANSI D6.1-1971. The ANSI organization has withdrawn its 1971 standard and the U.S. Department of Transportation has issued an updated standard entitled: A Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Because the OSHA standard is out-of-date, the Agency intends to propose changes to update Subpart G to incorporate the requirements of the Department of Transportation's MUTCD into the OSHA rule.
1951. STEEL ERECTION (PART 1926) (SAFETY PROTECTION FOR IRONWORKERS)
Abstract: In 1992, OSHA announced that it would develop a proposal for revising steel erection safety requirements using the negotiated rulemaking process. In negotiated rulemaking, OSHA, public, industry and employee representatives meet as an advisory committee and attempt to forge a consensus on a proposed standard. An advisory committee for this rule was formed in 1994. Its work resulted in the publication of a proposed rule on August 13, 1998.
The written comment period ended November 17, 1998. A public hearing was held in Washington, D.C. on December 1-11, 1998. The post-hearing comment period closed April 12, 1999. OSHA is now working to complete a final rule.
Statement of Need: In 1989, the Ironworkers International Union and National Erectors Association petitioned OSHA to revise the steel erection standard through negotiated rulemaking. In light of the significant number of steel erection fatalities and injuries and concerns that the Agency's existing rule fails to adequately address a number of factors affecting safety, OSHA determined that the current rule needed to be revised.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for the proposed steel erection rule is a preliminary finding that workers engaged in steel erection work are at significant risk of serious injury or death as a result of that work.
Alternatives: OSHA considered continuing to rely on the existing rule.
The Agency also considered issuing a proposed rule without negotiated rulemaking. Leaving the existing rule unchanged was rejected because of the apparent inadequacies of the standard. Negotiated rulemaking was chosen to help resolve conflicts and produce a proposal sooner.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OSHA expects compliance with the proposal to impose annualized costs of about $50 million per year. Benefits are expected to include the prevention of about 14 fatalities and 824 lost workday injuries per year.
NPRM 08/13/98 63 FR 43451
NPRM Comment Period End 11/17/98
Public Hearing 12/01/98
Final Rule 07/00/00
1952. RECORDING AND REPORTING OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES (SIMPLIFIED INJURY/ILLNESS RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS)
Abstract: OSHA requires employers to keep records of occupational illnesses and injuries. These records are used by OSHA and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), among others, to develop data on workplace safety and health by industry and across industries. Over the years concerns about the reliability and utility of these data have been raised by Congress, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Academy of Sciences, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the General Accounting Office, business and labor, as well as BLS and OSHA. In the late 1980's, OSHA contracted with the Keystone Center to bring together representatives of industry, labor, government, and academia in a year-long effort to discuss problems with OSHA's injury and illness recordkeeping system. Keystone issued a report with specific recommendations on how to improve the system. In 1995, OSHA held several meetings with stakeholders from business, labor and government to obtain feedback on a draft OSHA recordkeeping proposal and to gather related information.
OSHA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the February 2, 1996 Federal Register that contained revised recordkeeping requirements and recordkeeping forms. The original 90-day public comment period was extended another 60 days and ended July 2, 1996. During that comment period, the public submitted over 450 written comments to OSHA Docket R-02. In addition, OSHA held two public meetings in Washington, DC (March 26-29 and April 30-May 1) resulting in 1,200 pages of transcripts from nearly 60 presentations. OSHA is now planning to issue a final rule that incorporates changes based on an analysis of the public comments and testimony.
All of these uses of the data are affected by the quality of the records employers maintain. Higher quality data lead to higher quality analyses, which in turn lead to better decisions about occupational safety and health matters. To improve the quality of the records and enhance the use of the information, OSHA needs to provide clearer regulatory guidance to employers and simplify the recordkeeping forms.
Alternatives: One alternative to publication of a final rule is to take no action and continue to administer the injury and illness recordkeeping system using the current regulation, forms and guidelines. Another alternative is to revise the current rule to expand its coverage and scope (i.e., eliminate the current rule's small employer and Standard Industrial Classification exemptions). The first alternative is unacceptable because it does not address the problems with the current system identified by participants in the Keystone dialogue and other OSHA stakeholders. The second alternative is also unacceptable because it would require many employers, especially small- business employers, in low hazard industries to keep OSHA injury and illness data. This could impose a substantial paperwork burden on those employers without commensurate benefit.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OSHA has not determined the costs and benefits of the final rule.
Risks: Not applicable.
Final Action 06/00/00
Final Action Effective 01/00/01
1953. ERGONOMICS PROGRAMS: PREVENTING MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS
Ultimately, the Agency decided that, given the magnitude of the problem, a regulatory approach was appropriate to ensure that the largest possible number of employers and employees become aware of the problems and ways of preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders. OSHA has examined and analyzed the extensive scientific literature documenting the problem of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, the causes of the problem, and effective solutions; conducted a telephone survey of over 3,000 establishments regarding their current practices to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders; and completed a number of site visits to facilities with existing programs. The Agency has also held numerous stakeholder meetings to solicit input from individuals regarding the possible contents of a standard to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Agency representatives have delivered numerous outreach presentations to people who are interested in this subject and consulted professionals in the field to obtain expert opinions on the options considered by the Agency. Information obtained from these activities is undergoing Agency review.
The Agency believes that the scientific evidence supports the need for a standard and that the availability of effective and reasonable means to control these hazards has been demonstrated. The Agency, therefore, has developed a proposed rule for ergonomics and is currently working on a final rule.
Statement of Need: OSHA estimates that work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the United States account for over 600,000 injuries and illnesses that are serious enough to result in days away from work (34 percent of all lost workday injuries reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)). These disorders now account for one out of every three dollars spent on workers' compensation. It is estimated that employers spend as much as $15-$18 billion a year on direct costs for MSD-related workers' compensation, and up to three to four times that much for indirect costs, such as those associated with hiring and training replacement workers. In addition to these monetary effects, MSDs often impose a substantial personal toll on affected workers who can no longer work or perform simple personal tasks like buttoning their clothes or brushing their hair.
Scientific evidence associates MSDs with stresses to various body parts caused by the way certain tasks are performed. The positioning of the body and the type of physical work that must be done to complete a job may cause persistent pain and lead to deterioration of the affected joints, tissues, and muscles. The longer the worker must maintain a fixed or awkward posture, exert force, repeat the same movements, experience vibration, or handle heavy items, the greater the chance that such a disorder will occur. These job-related stresses are referred to as "ergonomic risk factors," and the scientific literature demonstrates that exposure to these risk factors, particularly in combination, significantly increases an employee's risk of developing a work-related musculoskeletal disorder. Jobs involving exposure to ergonomic risk factors appear in all types of industries and in all sizes of facilities.
Musculoskeletal disorders occur in all parts of the body -- the upper extremity, the lower extremity, and the back. An example of the increasing magnitude of the problem involves repeated trauma to the upper extremity, or that portion of the body above the waist, in forms such as carpal tunnel syndrome and shoulder tendinitis. In industries such as meatpacking and automotive assembly, approximately 10 out of 100 workers report work-related MSDs from repeated trauma each year. The number of work-related back injuries occurring each year is even larger than the number of upper extremity disorders. Industries reporting a large number of cases of back injuries include hospitals and personal care facilities.
The evidence OSHA has assembled and analyzed indicates that technologically and economically feasible measures are available to significantly reduce exposures to ergonomic risk factors and the risk of developing work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Many companies that have voluntarily implemented ergonomics programs have demonstrated that effective ergonomic interventions are available to reduce MSDs. Many of these interventions are simple and inexpensive, but nevertheless have a significant effect on the occurrence of work- related musculoskeletal disorders. Benefits include substantial savings in workers' compensation costs, increased productivity, and decreased turnover.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for the rule is a finding by the Secretary of Labor that workers in workplaces within OSHA's jurisdiction are at significant risk of incurring work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
Alternatives: OSHA has considered many different regulatory alternatives. These include variations in the scope of coverage, particularly with regard to industrial sectors, work processes, and degree of hazard.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Implementation costs of an ergonomics program standard would include those related to identifying and correcting problem jobs using engineering and administrative controls. Benefits expected include reduced pain and suffering, both from prevented disorders as well as reduced severity in those disorders that do occur, decreased numbers of workers' compensation claims, and reduced lost work time. Secondary benefits may accrue from improved quality and productivity due to better designed work systems.
Risks: The data OSHA has obtained and analyzed indicate that employees are at significant risk of developing or aggravating musculoskeletal disorders due to exposure to risk factors in the workplace. In addition, information from site visits, the scientific literature, the Agency's compliance experience, and other sources indicates that there are economically and technologically feasible means of addressing and reducing these risks to prevent the development or aggravation of such disorders, or to reduce their severity. These data and analyses were presented in the preamble to the proposed standard published in the Federal Register.
SBREFA Panel 03/02/99
NPRM 11/23/99 64 FR 65768
Final Action 12/00/00
1954. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO TUBERCULOSIS
On October 17, 1997 OSHA published its proposed standard for occupational exposure to TB (62 FR 54160). The proposed standard would cover workers in hospitals, nursing homes, hospices, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, and certain other work settings where workers are at significant risk of becoming infected with TB while caring for their patients or clients or performing certain procedures. The proposed standard would require employers to protect TB-exposed workers using infection control measures that have been shown to be highly effective in reducing or eliminating work-related TB infections. Such measures include procedures for early identification of individuals with infectious TB, isolation of individuals with infectious TB using appropriate ventilation, use of respiratory protection in certain situations, and skin testing and training of employees.
After the close of the written comment period for the proposed standard on February 17, 1998, informal public hearings were held in Washington, DC (April 7-17), Los Angeles, CA (May 5-7), New York City, NY (May 19- 21), and Chicago, IL (June 2-4). At the end of the public hearings a post-hearing comment period was established. The post-hearing comment period closed on October 5, 1998. On June 17, 1999 OSHA re-opened the rulemaking record to submit the Agency's report on homeless shelters and certain other documents that became available to the Agency after the close of the post-hearing comment period. During this limited re- opening of the rulemaking record, OSHA also requested interested parties to submit comments and data on the Agency's preliminary risk assessment in order to obtain the best, most recent data for providing the most accurate estimates of the occupational risk of tuberculosis.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs will be incurred by employers for engineering controls, respiratory protection, medical surveillance, training, exposure control, recordkeeping, and work practice controls. Benefits will include the prevention of work-related TB transmissions and infections, and a corresponding reduced risk of exposure among the general population. OSHA estimates that more than 5 million workers are exposed to TB in the course of their work. The Agency estimates that the proposed provisions will result in annual costs of 245 million dollars. Implementation of the standard is estimated to reduce the number of work-related cases of TB by 70-90 percent in the work settings covered, thus preventing approximately 21,400 to 25,800 work- related infections per year, 1,500 to 1,700 active cases of TB resulting from these infections, and approximately 115 to 136 deaths resulting from these active cases.
Risks: From 1985 to 1992, the number of reported cases of TB in the United States increased, reversing a previous 30-year downward trend. While there has been a recent decrease in the reported number of cases of TB in the general population, a large part of this decrease can be attributed to focused intervention efforts in areas of high incidence of TB. Fourteen states showed an increase or no change in the number of reported cases in 1998, and the factors that contributed to the resurgence continue to exist, along with exposure of certain workers to patient or client populations with an increased rate of TB. In addition, TB outbreaks continue to occur and multidrug-resistant strains of TB continue to spread to new states. Therefore, employees in work settings such as health care or correctional facilities, who have contact with infectious individuals, are at high risk of occupational transmission of TB. OSHA estimates that the average lifetime occupational risk of TB infection ranges from 30-386 infections per 1000 workers exposed to TB on the job and that the average lifetime occupational risk of TB disease ranges from 3-39 cases of active TB disease per 1000 workers exposed to TB. Active disease can cause signs and symptoms such as fatigue, weight loss, fever, night sweats, loss of appetite, persistent cough, and shortness of breath, and may result in serious respiratory illness or death.
2nd Reopening Comment Period End 06/28/99 64 FR 34625
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State, Local, Tribal
1955. NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED TESTING LABORATORIES PROGRAMS: FEES
Abstract: A number of OSHA standards require that certain products and equipment used in the workplace be tested and certified by a laboratory that has been recognized and accredited by OSHA. Through the Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) Program OSHA has, to date, recognized 16 laboratories operating 40 sites in the U.S., Canada, and the Far East as NRTLs. OSHA has proposed to revise 29 CFR 1910.7 to allow OSHA to charge fees to NRTLs for services that are provided to the NRTLs. The fees will be computed on the basis of the cost of the services to the Government. In determining the amount of such fees, OSHA will follow the guidelines established by the Office of Management and Budget in Circular Number A-25. The proposal was published on August 18, 1999, and the Agency is now working on a final rule.
NPRM 08/18/99 64 FR 45098
NPRM Process 10/04/99
Final 06/00/00
Agency Contact: Bernard Pasquet, Directorate of Technical Support, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, N3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210 Phone: 202 693-2300
1956. EMPLOYER PAYMENT FOR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
Recently, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission declined to accept this interpretation (Secretary of Labor v. Union Tank Car, OSHRC No. 96-0563). The Commission vacated a citation against an employer who failed to pay for OSHA-required PPE, finding that the Secretary had failed to adequately explain the policy outlined in the 1994 memorandum in light of several inconsistent earlier letters of interpretation from OSHA. Therefore, the Agency needs to clarify who is to pay for PPE under what conditions, to eliminate any confusion and unnecessary litigation.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule is the need to clarify OSHA's intent with regard to the payment for protective equipment required by OSHA.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: It is estimated that this rule will shift, at most, annualized costs to employers of no more than $62 million across all affected industries. It is also estimated that the proposed rule will prevent over 47,000 injuries and seven fatalities that occur annually as a result of the non-use or misuse of personal protective equipment by employees required to pay for their own PPE.
1957. CONSULTATION AGREEMENTS
Abstract: OSHA proposed an amendment to 29 CFR 1908, the Agency's regulations governing consultation agreements, to provide for full employee involvement in the consultative process in line with the President's directive to enhance worker participation in the consultation program (The New OSHA: Reinventing Worker Safety and Health, May 1995), and to implement the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Compliance Assistance Authorization Act of 1999(Section 21(d) of the OSH Act.
NPRM 07/02/99 64 FR 35972
Final Action 05/00/00
Agency Contact: Paula O. White, Director, Directorate of Federal State Operations, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N3700, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2213
1958. PLAIN LANGUAGE REVISIONS TO THE EXIT ROUTES STANDARD
NPRM 09/10/96 61 FR 47712
Public Hearing 04/29/97 62 FR 9402
Final Rule 08/00/00
Agency Contact: Marthe B. Kent, Director, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N3609, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210 Phone: 202 693-1950 Fax: 202 693-1678
1959. RESPIRATORY PROTECTION (PROPER USE OF MODERN RESPIRATORS)
Final Rule Effective 01/08/98
Final Rule - Assigned Protection Factors 12/00/01
1960. LONGSHORING AND MARINE TERMINALS (PARTS 1917 AND 1918) -- REOPENING OF THE RECORD (VERTICAL TANDEM LIFTS (VTLS))
Abstract: OSHA issued a final rule on Longshoring on July 25, 1997 (62 FR 40142). However, in that rule, the Agency reserved provisions related to vertical tandem lifts. Vertical tandem lifts (VTLs) involve the lifting of two empty single intermodal containers, secured together with twist locks, at the same time. Because some commenters to the record questioned the safety of allowing such tandem lifts and the record does not contain adequate information to allow the Agency to address this issue, OSHA is gathering additional information. The Agency will make a decision about whether to proceed with rulemaking or to address this issue through a compliance directive in early 2000.
Final Rule on Longshoring/Marine Terminals 07/25/97 62 FR 40142
1961. SCAFFOLDS IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915 -- SUBPART N)
1962. ACCESS AND EGRESS IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915, SUBPART E) (SHIPYARDS: EMERGENCY EXITS AND AISLES)
Abstract: In the 1980s, OSHA embarked on a project to update and consolidate OSHA standards that applied to the shipbuilding, shiprepair, and shipbreaking industry. Shipyard employers are subject to both the shipyard and general industry standards and this project aimed at establishing a vertical standard for shipyard employment by addressing six subparts (Confined Spaces, Welding, Access/Egress, Personal Protective Equipment, Fall Protection and Scaffolding). Proposals on these subparts were issued in November 1988 (53 FR 48092). Final rules have been issued on two of these proposals: Personal Protective Equipment and Confined Spaces. The remaining subparts in part 1915 were categorized as Phase II of the consolidation project (including General Working Conditions and Fire Protection).
1963. GLYCOL ETHERS: 2-METHOXYETHANOL, 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND THEIR ACETATES: PROTECTING REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH
Abstract: On May 20, 1986, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a report to OSHA, under section 9(a) of the Toxic Substance Control Act, stating that EPA had reasonable basis to conclude that the risk of injury to worker health from exposure to four glycol ethers during their manufacture, processing and use was unreasonable, and that this risk could be prevented or reduced to a significant extent by OSHA regulatory action. EPA gave OSHA 180 days in which to respond to its report. OSHA published its response on December 11, 1986, stating that OSHA had preliminarily concluded that occupational exposures to the subject glycol ethers at the current OSHA permissible exposure limits may present significant risks to the health of workers. OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on April 2, 1987 (52 FR 10586). OSHA used the information received in response to the ANPRM, as well as other information and analysis, and published a proposal on March 23, 1993 (58 FR 15526), that would reduce the permissible exposure limits for four glycol ethers and provide protection for approximately 46,000 workers exposed to these substances. OSHA is working toward promulgation of a final rule in 2001.
Final Action 04/00/01
1964. ACCREDITATION OF TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS (PART 1910)
Abstract: The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-499) established the criteria under which OSHA was to develop and promulgate the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response standard. OSHA issued an interim final standard on December 19, 1986 (51 FR 45654) to comply with the law's requirements. OSHA issued a permanent final rule for provisions on training to replace this interim rule on March 9, 1989 (29 CFR 1910.120).
On December 22, 1987, as part of an omnibus budget reconciliation bill (PL 100-202), Congress amended section 126(d)(3) of SARA to include accreditation of training programs for hazardous waste operations. OSHA issued a proposal on January 26, 1990 (55 FR 2776) addressing this issue. OSHA received public comments following the issuance of the proposal. OSHA also reopened the record in June 1992 to allow additional public comment on an effectiveness of training study that the Agency had conducted. OSHA has also developed nonmandatory guidelines to further address minimum training criteria.
1965. INDOOR AIR QUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE
Every day, more than 20 million American workers face an unnecessary health threat because of indoor air pollution in the workplace. Thousands of heart disease deaths, hundreds of lung cancer deaths, and many cases of respiratory disease, Legionnaire's disease, asthma, and other ailments are estimated to be linked to this occupational hazard. EPA estimates that 20 to 35 percent of all workers in modern mechanically ventilated buildings may experience air-quality related signs and symptoms.
Agency Contact: Marthe B. Kent, Acting Director, Directorate of Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N3718, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210 Phone: 202 693-1950 Fax: 202 693-1678
1966. SAFETY AND HEALTH PROGRAMS (FOR GENERAL INDUSTRY AND THE MARITIME INDUSTRIES)
Abstract: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), many of the States, members of the safety and health community, insurance companies, professional organizations, companies participating in the Agency's Voluntary Protection Programs, and many proactive employers in all industries recognize the value of worksite- specific safety and health programs in preventing job-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities. The reductions in job-related injuries and illnesses, workers' compensation costs, and absenteeism that occur after employers implement such programs dramatically demonstrate the effectiveness of these programs. In 1989, OSHA published nonmandatory guidelines to help employers establish safety and health programs (54 FR 3904). Those guidelines were based on a distillation of the best safety and health management practices observed by OSHA in the years since the Agency was established. OSHA has decided to expand on these guidelines by developing a safety and health programs rule because occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities are continuing to occur at an unacceptably high rate. For example, an average of about 17 workers were killed each day in 1997. This number does not include an estimated 137 daily deaths associated with job-related chronic illnesses.
The safety and health programs required by the proposed rule will include the following core elements: management leadership; active employee participation; hazard identification and assessment; hazard prevention and control; information and training ; and program evaluation. In response to extensive stakeholder involvement, OSHA has, among other things, focused the rule on significant hazards and reduced burdens on small business to the extent consistent with the goals of the OSH Act.
Statement of Need: Worksite-specific safety and health programs are increasingly being recognized as the most effective way of reducing job-related accidents, injuries, and illnesses. Many States have to date passed legislation and/or regulations mandating such programs for some or all employers, and insurance companies have also been encouraging their client companies to implement these programs, because the results they have achieved have been dramatic. In addition, all of the companies in OSHA's Voluntary Protection Programs have established such programs and are reporting injury and illness rates that are sometimes only 20 percent of the average for other establishments in their industry. Safety and health programs apparently achieve these results by actively engaging front-line employees, who are closest to operations in the workplace and have the highest stake in preventing job-related accidents, in the process of identifying and correcting occupational hazards. Finding and fixing workplace hazards is a cost- effective process, both in terms of the avoidance of pain and suffering and the prevention of the expenditure of large sums of money to pay for the direct and indirect costs of these injuries and illnesses. For example, many employers report that these programs return between $5 and $9 for every dollar invested in the program, and almost all employers with such programs experience substantial reductions in their workers' compensation premiums. OSHA believes that having employers evaluate the job-related safety and health hazards in their workplace and address any hazards identified before they cause occupational injuries, illnesses, or deaths is an excellent example of "regulating smarter," because all parties will benefit: workers will avoid the injuries and illnesses they are currently experiencing; employers will save substantial sums of money and increase their productivity and competitiveness; and OSHA's scarce resources will be leveraged as employers and employees join together to identify, correct, and prevent job-related safety and health hazards.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OSHA preliminarily estimated the overall program costs of the draft proposed standard provided to the SBREFA Panel for this rule for all covered employers to be about $2.3 billion per year. The Agency also estimates that 580,000 to 1,300,000 injuries and illnesses and 416 to 918 fatalities will be avoided each year as a result of the rule. OSHA anticipates that employers will have direct cost savings associated with this reduction in the number of injuries and illnesses of approximately $7.3 to $16.5 billion per year.
Risks: Workers in all major industry sectors in the United States continue to experience an unacceptably high rate of occupational fatalities, injuries, and illnesses. For 1996, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 6.2 million injuries and illnesses occurred within private industry. For 1997, BLS reported that 6,218 workers lost their lives on the job. There is increasing evidence that addressing hazards in a piecemeal fashion, as employers tend to do in the absence of a comprehensive safety and health program, is considerably less effective in reducing accidents than a systematic approach. Dramatic evidence of the seriousness of this problem can be found in the staggering workers' compensation bill paid by America's employers and employees: about $54 billion annually. These risks can be reduced by the implementation of safety and health programs, as evidenced by the experience of OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program participants, who regularly achieve injury and illness rates averaging one-fifth to one- third those of competing firms in their industries. Because the proposed rule addresses significant job-related hazards, the rule will be effective in ensuring a systematic approach to the control of long- recognized hazards, such as lead, which are covered by existing OSHA standards, and emerging hazards, such as lasers and violence in the workplace, where conditions in the workplace would require control under the General Duty Clause of the Act.
1967. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM (PREVENTING OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS: CHROMIUM)
NPRM 06/00/01
1968. CONFINED SPACES IN CONSTRUCTION (PART 1926): PREVENTING SUFFOCATION/EXPLOSIONS IN CONFINED SPACES
NPRM 07/00/01
1969. GENERAL WORKING CONDITIONS FOR SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT
NPRM 04/00/01
1970. FIRE PROTECTION IN SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT (PART 1915, SUBPART P) (SHIPYARDS: FIRE SAFETY)
1971. METALWORKING FLUIDS: PROTECTING RESPIRATORY HEALTH
1972. FALL PROTECTION IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Abstract: OSHA issued an ANPRM to gather information on fall protection issues regarding certain construction processes such as residential home building, precast concrete operations and post frame construction. The issues relate to the fall protection rules as they now apply to roofing work, residential construction operations, climbing reinforcement steel and vendors delivering materials to construction projects. These issues have arisen since OSHA revised the fall protection standard in August 1994. The comment period closed January 24, 2000. OSHA is now evaluating comments to determine whether further action is required.
1973. REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATION RECORDS FOR TESTS, INSPECTIONS, AND TRAINING
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910; 29 CFR 1915; 29 CFR 1926; 29 CFR 1917; 29 CFR 1918
Abstract: Various OSHA standards require employers to prepare and maintain records to certify that they have tested or inspected certain types of equipment or machinery, or that they have provided training to employees. OSHA is considering whether to propose to revoke some of these certification provisions, in order to reduce paperwork burdens on employers. Such a proposal would not change the substantive requirements for employers to perform the testing, inspecting, and training.
1975. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO CRYSTALLINE SILICA
Abstract: Silica exposure remains a serious threat to nearly 2 million U.S. workers, including more than 100,000 workers in high risk jobs such as abrasive blasting, foundry work, stonecutting, rock drilling, quarry work and tunneling. The seriousness of the health hazards associated with silica exposure is demonstrated by the fatalities and disabling illnesses that continue to occur in sandblasters and rock drillers and by recent studies that demonstrate a statistically significant increase in lung cancer among silica-exposed workers. In October 1996, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified crystalline silica as "carcinogenic to humans." Exposure studies indicate that some workers are still exposed to very high levels of silica. Although OSHA currently has a permissible exposure limit for crystalline silica (10mg/m3 divided by the percent of silica in the dust + 2 respirable), more than 30 percent of OSHA-collected silica samples from 1982 through 1991 exceeded this limit. Additionally recent studies suggest that the current OSHA standard is insufficient to protect against silicosis. OSHA plans to publish a proposed rule on crystalline silica under section 6(b)(5) of the Act. The standard would protect silica-exposed workers in general industry, construction and maritime.
1976. CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY (LOCKOUT) IN CONSTRUCTION (PART 1926) (PREVENTING CONSTRUCTION INJURIES/FATALITIES: LOCKOUT)
1977. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO BERYLLIUM
Abstract: Beryllium is a lightweight metal that is used for nuclear weapons, for atomic energy, and for metal alloys such as beryllium- copper and beryllium-aluminum. The metal alloys are used in dental appliances, golf clubs, non-sparking tools, wheel chairs, etc. Beryllium is also used in the ceramics industry. OSHA's current permissible exposure limits for beryllium are: an 8-hour TWA of 2 ug/ m3; a 5 ug/m3 ceiling concentration not to be exceeded over a 30-minute period; and a 25 ug/m3 maximum peak exposure never to be exceeded. In 1977, OSHA proposed to reduce the 8-hour TWA exposure to beryllium from 2 ug/m3 to 1 ug/m3 based on evidence that beryllium caused lung cancer in exposed workers. A hearing followed the proposal, but a final standard was never published. Since the previous OSHA hearing, NIOSH has updated its studies on beryllium exposed workers. The study results again demonstrate a significant excess of lung cancer among exposed workers. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has concluded that beryllium is a carcinogen in humans (Category I). In addition to lung cancer, a new OSHA beryllium standard would address chronic beryllium disease (CBD), a fatal disease involving lung fibrosis and other organ toxicity. Based on several recent studies involving workers employed in the beryllium ceramics industry, in beryllium production, and in Department of Energy facilities, there is now evidence that very low level beryllium exposure (less than 0.5 ug/ m3) may cause CBD. A new medical surveillance tool is now available that allows for the early detection of workers with CBD prior to any signs of clinical disease or symptoms. Beryllium-sensitized workers convert to CBD at an estimated rate of about 10 percent per year. This "beryllium sensitization" test is being used in clinical studies of current and past exposed workers. Recent study results indicate that between 5 percent and 15 percent of beryllium-exposed workers are sensitized and will eventually develop CBD.
In the past year, OSHA was petitioned to issue an emergency temporary standard (ETS) by the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers Union(PACE) to protect workers from developing Chronic Beryllium Disease(CBD) and lung cancer as a result of occupational beryllium exposure. The petition was denied, but the Agency has initiated rulemaking under Section 6(b)(5) to protect beryllium-exposed workers from contracting these diseases.
NPRM 09/00/01
1978. CONSOLIDATION OF RECORDS MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS IN OSHA STANDARDS
Phone: 202 693-1950 Fax: 202 693-1678
1979. WALKING WORKING SURFACES AND PERSONAL FALL PROTECTION SYSTEMS (1910) (SLIPS, TRIPS AND FALL PREVENTION)
Abstract: In 1990, OSHA proposed (55 FR 13360) a rule addressing slip, trip, and fall hazards and establishing requirements for personal fall protection systems. OSHA is analyzing the record to determine if it is appropriate to repropose the standard or to issue a final rule based on the existing record.
1980. OIL AND GAS WELL DRILLING AND SERVICING
1981. CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY SOURCES (LOCKOUT/TAGOUT) (COMPLETION OF A SECTION 610 REVIEW)
Abstract: As required by section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and section 5 of Executive Order 12866, OSHA has reviewed the Agency's standard for the protection of employees from exposure to lockout/ tagout hazards, 29 CFR 1910.147, to determine whether the rule should be continued without change or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, to minimize any significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. After a thorough review of the Agency's experience in enforcing this standard, the available literature, and comments received in connection with this review, OSHA has determined that there is a continued need for the rule, that the rule does not appear to overlap, duplicate, or conflict with other Federal rules or with other State and local rules, and that no technological, economic or other factors have arisen since the rule was published that would necessitate amendment or rescission of the rule at this time. OSHA has also concluded that no change that is consistent with the objectives of the OSH Act can be made to the rule that will further minimize any significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Data submitted to the docket in connection with this Lookback Review demonstrate that the rule has decreased lockout-related fatalities in certain industries by 20 percent or more each year since promulgation of the standard. To respond to comments received during this review of the standard, OSHA will revise the compliance directive for this standard, review the Agency's interpretive guidance pertaining to this rule, and develop and disseminate training and other compliance assistance materials to assist employers in complying with the rule. The final report summarizing the results of this Lookback Review has been placed in Docket S-012-B.
Publish Report 01/30/00