Thursday, December 20, 2007

Part II

Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1915 General Working Conditions in Shipyard Employment; Proposed Rule

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72452 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR docket number for this rulemaking V. Summary of the Preliminary Economic (Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006–0675). and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Occupational Safety and Health All comments, including any personal Analyses Administration information you provide, are placed in VI. Environmental Assessment VII. Federalism the public docket without change and 29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1915 VIII. Unfunded Mandates may be made available online at http:// IX. OMB Review under the Paperwork [Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006–0675 www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA Reduction Act of 1995 (formerly OSHA Docket No. S–049)] cautions you about submitting personal X. State Plan Standards information such as social security XI. Public Participation RIN 1218-AB50 numbers and birthdates. For further XII. Authority and Signature XIII. The Proposed Standard General Working Conditions in information on submitting comments, Shipyard Employment plus additional information on the References and Exhibits rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public In this Federal Register notice, OSHA AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Participation’’ heading in the Administration (OSHA), Labor. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of references documents in Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006–0675 (formerly ACTION: this document. Proposed rule. OSHA Docket No. S–049) as well as Docket: To read or download documents in the following OSHA SUMMARY: OSHA proposes to revise the comments and materials submitted in rulemakings and advisory committee standards on general working response to this Federal Register notice, proceedings, which OSHA is conditions in shipyard employment. go to Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006– incorporating by reference into the The proposed revisions would update 0675 at http://regulations.gov or the docket of this rulemaking: existing requirements to reflect OSHA Docket Office at the address • The proceedings of the Shipyard advances in industry practices and above. All comments and submissions Employment Standards Advisory technology. The proposal also would in response to this Federal Register Committee (SESAC) (Docket Nos. cross reference general industry notice are listed in the http:// SESAC–1988 through SESAC–1993); standards either that are already regulations.gov index; however, some • applicable to shipyard employment or The proceedings of the Maritime information (e.g., copyrighted material) Advisory Committee for Occupational that OSHA intends to apply. Finally, is not publicly available to read or OSHA proposes to add provisions that Safety and Health (Docket Nos. download through the Web page. All MACOSH–1995 through MACOSH– would provide protection from hazards comments and submissions, including not addressed by existing standards, 2005); copyrighted material, are available for • The General Industry Lockout/ including provisions on the control of inspection and copying at the OSHA Tagout rulemaking record (Docket Nos. hazardous energy (lockout/tagout). Docket Office. S–012, S–012A and S–012B; DATES: Comments and requests for For information on reading or • The Shipyard Employment hearings must be submitted downloading exhibits referenced in this Standards rulemaking record (Docket (postmarked, sent or received) by March Federal Register notice, see the No. S–024); and 19, 2008. ‘‘References and exhibits’’ and ‘‘Public • The Field Sanitation rulemaking ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Participation’’ headings in the record (Docket No. H–308). identified by Docket No. OSHA-S049– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of References to documents in Docket 2006–0675, by any of the following this document. No. OSHA-S049–2006–0675. In this methods: Electronic copies of this Federal Federal Register notice, references to Electronically: You may submit Register document are available at documents in Docket No. OSHA-S049– comments and attachments http://www.regulations.gov. This 2006–0675 (formerly OSHA Docket No. electronically at http:// document, as well as news releases and S–049) are given as ‘‘Ex.’’ followed by www.regulations.gov, which is the other relevant information, also are the number of the document. These Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the available at OSHA’s Web page at http:// exhibits are posted in both Docket No. instructions on-line for making www.osha.gov OSHA-S049–2006–0675 (which is electronic submissions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available at http://www.regulations.gov) Fax: If your comments, including Press inquiries: Kevin Ropp, OSHA, and OSHA Docket No. S–049 (which is attachments, do not exceed 10 pages, Office of Communications, Room N– available at http://dockets.osha.gov). you may fax them to the OSHA Docket 3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 The referenced exhibits are also Office at (202) 693–1648. Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, available for inspection and copying at Mail, hand delivery, express mail, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–1999. the OSHA Docket Office (see ADDRESSES messenger or courier service: You must section). For general and technical submit three copies of your comments References to documents in the information: Dorothy Dougherty, and attachments to the OSHA Docket dockets incorporated by reference. In Director, OSHA, Directorate of Office, Docket No. OSHA–S049–2006– this Federal Register notice, references Standards and Guidance, Room N–3718, 0675, U.S. Department of Labor, Room to documents in the dockets listed U.S. Department of Labor, 200 N–2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., above that OSHA is incorporating by Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) reference are given as the docket DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2222. 693–2350 (OSHA’s TTY number is (877) number followed by the document 889–5627). Deliveries (hand, express SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: number. Thus, the reference to ‘‘Docket mail, messenger and courier service) are Table of Contents H–308, Ex. 1’’ means Exhibit 1 in the accepted during the Department of I. Background Field Sanitation rulemaking docket. For Labor’s and Docket Office’s normal II. Regulatory History access to exhibits in OSHA Docket H– business hours, 8:15 a.m.–4:45 p.m., e.t. III. Pertinent Legal Authority 308 and the other dockets above that Instructions: All submissions must IV. Summary and Explanation of the OSHA is incorporating by reference, go include the Agency name and the Proposed Standard to OSHA’s Webpage at http://

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72453

dockets.osha.gov or the OSHA Docket due to the nature of their work, which which reported 155 shipyard fatalities Office (see ADDRESSES section). includes a wide variety of industrial from 1992–2002 or an average of 14 operations, such as steel fabrication, fatalities per year. According to CFOI I. Background welding, abrasive blasting, burning, data, during most of those years the OSHA is proposing to revise and electrical work, pipefitting, rigging and fatality rate in shipyard employment update the existing standards in subpart stripping and coating applications. They was about twice the rate for all private F of 29 CFR part 1915 that address also operate complex or heavy industry combined, which further hazardous working conditions in equipment such as cranes and powered demonstrates the hazardous nature of shipyard employment. These standards industrial trucks. The hazards work in shipyard employment. As cover many diverse working conditions associated with these work activities are discussed below, many of those in shipyard employment, including heightened because they are often shipyard fatalities involved the types of housekeeping, lighting, utilities, work in performed outdoors in all kinds of hazards this rulemaking addresses. confined or isolated spaces, lifeboats, weather, onboard vessels, in confined or Injuries and illnesses. To estimate the sanitation and medical services and first enclosed spaces below deck, on aid. number of shipyard injuries and scaffolds and on busy and crowded illnesses, OSHA used the BLS annual OSHA also proposes to add new docks filled with equipment and survey of employers, which produces requirements to subpart F to protect material. The safe coordination of these statistical estimates of occupational employees from hazardous working work activities is also complicated by injuries and illnesses by industry and conditions not currently addressed by the fact that most shipyards are multi- specific characteristics (www.bls.gov). subpart F. These proposed additions employer worksites where shipyard From 1992–2002, BLS data show that include the control of hazardous energy employees, ship’s crew, contractors and the occupational injury and illness rate (lockout/tagout), safe operation and subcontractors work side-by-side and maintenance of vehicles, accident for shipyard employment declined from often on the same ship’s systems at the prevention signs and tags and servicing 34.2 per 100 full-time employees in same time. The combination of these of multi-piece and single piece rim 1992 to 16.6 in 2002. Lost workday hazards presents a significant risk of wheels. injury and illness rates showed a similar OSHA adopted the existing subpart F injury to shipyard employees whether they are working on vessels or at trend, declining from 16.9 in 1993 to 9.3 standards in 1972 (37 FR 22458 (10/19/ in 2002 (See Table 1). However, despite 1972)) pursuant to section 6(a) of the landside operations. As this section illustrates, OSHA believes the proposed these improvements, the industry’s Occupational Safety and Health Act of injury and illness rates continue to be 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.). rule will significantly reduce those risks. more than three times the average Section 6(a) permitted OSHA, within private sector rate of 5.3 for injuries and two years of the passage of the OSH Act, Accident, Fatality and Injury Data illnesses combined and 2.8 for lost to adopt as an occupational safety or workday cases (Table 1). health standard any national consensus OSHA examined several data sources and established Federal standards. The to identify and characterize the risks Using the median number of days provisions in subpart F were adopted shipyard employees face from the away from work per case as an indicator from existing Federal regulations hazards this proposal addresses. These of severity, the injuries and illnesses promulgated under Section 41 of the data show, for example, that the shipyard employees experienced were, Longshore and Harbor Workers’ shipyard industry has one of the highest on average, more severe than those in Compensation Act (LHWCA) (33 U.S.C. rates and severity of workplace injury of the private sector as a whole as well as 941) as well as national consensus all private sector industries. in the manufacturing and construction standards. Fatalities. To identify shipyard sectors. In 2002, for example, the OSHA believes the revisions and fatalities, OSHA reviewed accident data median days away from work in the additions to subpart F that it proposes from OSHA’s Integrated Management shipbuilding and repair industry was 15 are necessary and appropriate to protect Information System (IMIS) accident days per lost workday case, more than the safety and health of shipyard database (fatal and serious injury double the private sector median of employees. OSHA’s reasons for the requiring hospitalization) and the seven (Table 1). In addition, a higher necessity of the proposed standard are Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Census percentage of lost workday cases in discussed below. of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI). shipyards involved lengthy recovery According to the IMIS data, there were periods. For example, more than one- Hazards 231 fatal shipyard accidents during the third (34%) of shipyard lost workday Working in shipyards is one of the years 1987–2002, which is an average of cases resulted in more than 30 days riskiest occupations in the United 15 shipyard fatalities each year (Ex. 13). away from work compared to one- States. Shipyard employees are at risk This estimate is consistent with CFOI, quarter of private sector cases (Table 1).

TABLE 1.—2002 INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA COMPARISONS

Lost workday Percentage of Percentage of Injury and illness (LWD) injury and LWD cases LWD cases Industry rate per 100 full- illness rate per Median days involving more involving more time employees 100 full-time away from work than 5 days than 30 days employees away from work away from work

Shipbuilding and Repair ...... 16.6 9.3 15 62.2 34.1 Total Private Sector ...... 5.3 2.8 7 55.2 25.1 Manufacturing ...... 7.2 4.1 8 56.7 26.0 Construction ...... 7.1 3.8 10 58.4 28.9

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72454 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

(Source: BLS) resulted from being caught in Under the proposed lockout/tagout equipment. provisions, this employer would have Need for Agency Action OSHA’s IMIS fatal accidents database been required to have an energy control A detailed examination of OSHA and also confirms that a significant number program and control procedures in BLS databases indicates that a of shipyard deaths have resulted from place to ensure that employees properly significant percentage of shipyard hazardous energy. From 1987–2002, the deenergize circuits, verify isolation and fatalities and injuries have resulted from IMIS data reported 14 (6%) shipyard apply lockout or tagout systems before the types of hazardous working fatalities related to the sudden release of starting work (proposed § 1915.89(b)(1), conditions the proposed rule addresses, hazardous energy. (See also, Ex. 11, (2) and (4)). particularly hazardous energy. OSHA National Shipbuilding Research The investigation also found that, believes that eliminating or controlling Program (NSRP), ‘‘Review of Current although employees received general these hazardous conditions will reduce and Best Practices for Hazardous Energy safety training, there was no indication the risks that shipyard employees face Control (Tagout) in Shipyards.’’) A that the victim had received training on on a daily basis. This section discusses review of the IMIS shipyard fatality servicing high-voltage equipment and the types of fatalities and injuries that abstracts indicates that the proposed the supervisor had no electrical training. could have been prevented if the lockout/tagout provisions could have Moreover, even when the victim proposed additions and revisions to prevented the vast majority (9) of those accidentally turned off the wrong power subpart F had been in place. OSHA’s hazardous energy deaths (see Section source earlier in the workshift, leaving preliminary economic analysis, V). The following are some of the the dry dock in the dark, the employee summarized in Section V, estimates that shipyard fatalities that the proposed was not provided with refresher the proposed rule would have prevented lockout/tagout provisions could have training. Had the proposed lockout/ at least 17.8 of the fatalities reported in prevented. (The summary and tagout provisions been in place, it the IMIS database from 1987 through explanation of proposed § 1915.89 also would have ensured that any shipyard 2002. discusses a number of fatalities that employee servicing high-voltage Lockout/tagout. The most extensive could have been prevented by the equipment was an ‘‘authorized provisions in the proposal address the proposed lockout/tagout provisions). employee’’ who had been trained to A shipyard employee working on a control of hazardous energy. Exposure recognize hazardous energy sources and 480-volt distribution center was fatally to hazardous energy has resulted in know the specific means and electrocuted when the circuit was not procedures necessary to isolate and many injuries to shipyard employees. properly deenergized and locked out control such energy safely (proposed According to a study by the National before the task was started. In a similar § 1915.89(b)(7)). The proposed Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP), case, an employee was electrocuted provisions also would have ensured that during a five-year period there were 10 installing a fan on an HVAC chiller employees receive additional training hazardous energy-related injuries because the fan circuit was not ‘‘whenever the employer has reason to annually at the seven participating deenergized. Instead of verifying that believe, that there are * * * shipyards. (See Ex. 11, NSRP ‘‘Review the circuit was deenergized, the deficiencies in the employee’s of Current and Best Practices for employee had relied on a helper to open knowledge or use of the energy control Hazardous Energy Control (Tagout) in the circuit breaker to deenergize the procedures’’ (proposed Shipyards.’’) The report concluded that unit. However, the helper opened the § 1915.89(b)(7)(iii)). in almost every case, the injury was the wrong breaker. In both cases, there was The proposed lockout/tagout result of multiple failures in the system, no indication in the IMIS abstract that provisions addressing multiple such as failure to identify all hazardous the employer had a lockout/tagout employer worksites (proposed energy sources and to properly verify program or had established written § 1915.89(e)(2)) and group lockout/ deenergization of all sources (Ex. 11, p. energy control procedures, such as tagout (proposed § 1915.89(e)(3)) also 6). This report suggests that the procedures for deenergizing power could have prevented several shipyard proposed comprehensive lockout/tagout sources and verifying isolation. The fatalities reported in the IMIS database. program and energy control procedures lockout/tagout proposal would have In one of those cases, an electrician who would be effective in preventing these required both. was modifying a switchboard was types of injuries. In another case in the IMIS database, fatally electrocuted when a ship’s crew Hazardous energy exposure also has an employee, who was assigned to member, who was not familiar with the resulted in the death of a number of perform maintenance on a high-voltage operation of the switchboard breaker, shipyard employees. According to BLS electric transformer, was fatally inadvertently energized the circuit. The data for 1992–2002, almost one-quarter electrocuted when an oil switch to the proposed provisions would have of shipyard fatalities were types that are transformer was left open. According to ensured that the shipyard employer and often associated with hazardous energy. a NIOSH Fatality Assessment and ship’s officer or master shared BLS CFOI data showed that at least 10 Control Evaluation Program (FACE) information about their respective shipyard fatalities (6.3%) resulted from investigation of the accident, the high- lockout/tagout programs. The proposal contact with electrical current and 24 voltage transformer provided power to also would have ensured that when fatalities (16%) occurred because of numerous shipboard activities, but the more than one person is servicing contact with objects and equipment, employee’s electrical experience had equipment on a system, that a primary such as being caught in equipment that been primarily on low-voltage authorized employee is designated to suddenly starts up. BLS injury data equipment (Ex. 14). The investigation ascertain the exposure status of showed that an even greater percentage revealed that the power panels were not individual group members and of injuries were associated with those labeled and no signs, tags or locks had coordinate affected work forces to types of accidents. In 2002, for instance, been used on either the oil switch or ensure that each member of the group is 30 percent of shipyard injuries circuit breaker. In addition, there may fully protected (proposed involving days away from work resulted have been stored energy remaining in § 1915.89(e)(3)). from contact with an object or the conductors, but no tests were Finally, the lockout/tagout section of equipment and almost two percent conducted to verify deenergization. this proposal includes an in-depth

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72455

discussion of the application of the moving a large container and hit a A review of the IMIS database, from lockout/tagout standard while servicing pedestrian who he had not seen. In 1987 to 2002, indicates that there were commercial vessels, such as fish another incident, a shipyard employee at least 13 fatalities that may have been processing vessels. suffered fractured ribs and had to have prevented had the proposed provisions Motor vehicle safety equipment, his spleen removed when he was hit by been in effect. The following are a few operation and maintenance. OSHA is a forklift as he was walking along the cases from that IMIS database. At proposing several provisions aimed at side of the road in the shipyard. All of approximately 10 p.m. during an reducing the number of shipyard these accidents may have been evening workshift, a shipyard employee employees killed and injured in motor prevented if the employers had using a forklift truck to move a heavy vehicle incidents. According to CFOI established dedicated pedestrian/ tool box on a wet dock is presumed to data, 27 shipyard employees were killed bicycle lanes or provided employees have fallen through an opening in the in transportation incidents (highway with reflective vests, two of the options dock and drowned when he got out of and non-highway) from 1992–2002, the proposal includes to protect the forklift to check on the load. which represents 18.5 percent of all employees walking and bicycling in According to the abstract there were no fatalities during that period. OSHA’s shipyards from being hit by motor eye witnesses to the accident. There is IMIS fatal accidents data indicated that vehicles (proposed § 1915.93(c)(3)(i) and also no indication as to when the 12 employees were killed in motor (ii)). employer first noticed the employee was vehicle incidents in shipyards from Medical services and first aid. The missing. However, the abstract says that 1987–2002. Motor vehicle accidents also proposed rule includes revisions to the the employee’s body was not removed account for a significant number of existing provisions on medical services from the water until the next day. injuries. From 1992–2001, for instance, and first aid, including revisions In another case, the employee was BLS reported that 208 shipyard addressing the content of first aid working alone applying a patch over a employees were injured in training and location of first aid pipe opening prior to the time he went transportation accidents that were providers and kits in shipyards missing. There is no indication as to serious enough to involve days away (proposed § 1915.88). OSHA believes when the employer discovered the from work. that the proposed provisions will employee was missing and no OSHA believes that the proposed improve the chances that injured indication whether the employee was motor vehicle safety provisions could shipyard employees will survive if an checked on during or at the end of his have prevented a significant number of workshift. Approximately one week accident or health crisis (e.g., cardiac or those deaths and injuries. For example, later his body was discovered under the respiratory failure) occurs and are a review of the IMIS database shows water adjacent to the vessel on which he necessary to reduce fatality rates in the that the proposed safety belt had been working. shipyard industry. A review of the IMIS requirement (proposed § 1915.93(b)(1) Finally, a shipyard employee was database for 1987–2002 indicates that as and (2)) could have prevented the death working on an accommodation ladder many as 13 fatalities involving cardiac of a shipyard employee who was on the MV Cape Henry at Pier 27 in San or respiratory arrest may have been operating a mobile crane to lift metal Francisco. It is presumed that he fell off prevented had the proposed first aid plates from a floating dock. The the ladder or the vessel into the water. provisions been in place. employee was killed when the crane Nine days later his body was discovered overturned and he fell from the cab into Accounting for employees at the end floating in Fisherman’s Wharf. Again, the river and drowned. Had the of workshifts. Existing shipyard there is no indication in the abstract employee been wearing a safety belt, as standards require that employers whether the employer regularly checked the proposed rule requires, he would frequently check on employees who are on employees or accounted for them at have remained safely within the cab working in confined spaces or alone in the end of the workshift. when it overturned. OSHA also believes an isolated work location (§ 1915.94). Clarifications. In addition to the the proposed safety belt provision The proposal adds to the existing shipyard fatalities and injuries would prevent employees from being standard a provision requiring discussed above, OSHA believes that crushed or pinned trying to jump free of employers also to account for these other provisions in the proposal could a tipping vehicle, one of the major employees at the end of the workshift also prevent employees from being causes of industrial vehicle fatalities. In (proposed § 1915.84(b)). The purpose of injured or killed. A number of proposed 2001, for example, BLS reported that 28 both the existing and proposed provisions clarify existing requirements, percent (35) of all private industry provisions is to ensure that employees which may help increase employer forklift fatalities (123) involved tipovers remain safe, go home safe at the end of understanding of and compliance with or falls from a moving forklift. their workshifts and are promptly those requirements and thereby reduce The proposed provisions to protect rescued if they are injured. OSHA employee exposure to serious hazards. pedestrians and bicyclists in shipyards believes it is necessary to account for Based on the data and discussion from being hit by motor vehicles these employees at the end of their above and other information in the (proposed § 1915.93(c)(3)) could have workshifts, in part, because shipyards rulemaking record, OSHA believes that prevented several shipyard fatalities and are commonly comprised of many work there continues to be a significant risk injuries reported in the IMIS database. locations that often are spread out over of death and injury due to hazardous For example, a shipyard employee a large area. If an employee is injured working conditions in shipyards. As riding a bicycle as part of ‘‘his regularly while working alone at a distant work discussed, OSHA believes that the assigned tasks’’ was killed when a bus location, he may not be able to summon proposed revisions, additions and traveling on the same shipyard road help. If the employer does not account clarifications of subpart F are reasonable collided with him. A shipyard employee for an injured employee at the end of and necessary and will substantially walking on a pier was killed when a the workshift, that employee could die reduce that risk for shipyard employees. straddle lift truck ran over him. While from his injuries. The IMIS database pulling onto the main road on the pier, includes a number of fatalities in which II. Regulatory History the lift truck driver made a wide arc in the employees’ bodies were not The standards in subpart F have order to avoid hitting a forklift truck discovered until hours or days later. remained essentially unchanged since

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72456 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

they were adopted in 1972 from man and woman in the nation safe and whenever practical, standards shall ‘‘be established Federal occupational safety healthful working conditions and to expressed in terms of objective criteria and health standards issued under the preserve our human resources’’ (29 and of the performance desired’’ (29 LHWCA (33 U.S.C. 941). U.S.C. 651(b)). To achieve this goal, U.S.C. 655(b)(5)). In 1982, the Shipbuilders Council of Congress authorized the Secretary of IV. Summary and Explanation of the America and the American Waterways Labor to issue and enforce occupational Proposed Standard Shipyard Conference requested that safety and health standards. (See 29 OSHA: (1) revise and update the U.S.C. 655(a) (authorizing summary As mentioned above, OSHA proposes existing shipyard standards, including adoption of existing consensus and to revise and update the standards in subpart F; and (2) consolidate into a federal standards within two years of subpart F to reflect advances in single set of shipyard standards those the OSH Act’s enactment); 655(b) technology and industry practice and to general industry standards that apply to (authorizing promulgation of standards add requirements that would provide shipyards, particularly landside pursuant to notice and comment); and employees with protection from operations. In response to these 654(d)(2) (requiring employers to hazardous working conditions not recommendations, OSHA established comply with OSHA standards)). A currently addressed by the existing the Shipyard Employment Standards safety or health standard is a standard OSHA standards. This section explains Advisory Committee (SESAC) in ‘‘which requires conditions, or the the revisions and additions OSHA November 1988. The purpose of SESAC, adoption or use of one or more proposes, including what action these which included representatives from practices, means, methods, operations, revisions would require or prohibit and industry, labor and professionals in the or processes, reasonably necessary or how they differ from the existing maritime community, was to provide appropriate to provide safe or healthful standards. This section also discusses guidance and technical expertise to employment or places of employment’’ the purposes for these changes and why OSHA about revising the shipyard (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). they are necessary, and how they will standards. SESAC met from 1988 until A standard is reasonably necessary or provide employees with protection from 1993 to develop recommendations and appropriate within the meaning of hazardous working conditions in provide technical expertise in section 3(8) of the OSH Act if it shipyards. developing draft regulatory language for substantially reduces or eliminates Many of the provisions OSHA revising the shipyard safety standards. significant risk; is economically feasible; proposes were recommended by SESAC. On April 29, 1993, SESAC unanimously is technologically feasible; is cost They represent, to a large extent, approved final draft recommendations effective; is consistent with prior industry best practices at the time for revising subpart F to submit to Agency action or is a justified departure; SESAC reviewed subpart F. However, OSHA. (Docket SESAC 1993–2, Ex. is supported by substantial evidence; where changes in industry practices and 102X, p. 257) (Detailed discussion on and is better able to effectuate the Act’s technology have occurred since SESAC SESAC comments and specific purposes than any national consensus finished its review, OSHA has updated recommendations are presented in the standard it supersedes (29 U.S.C. 652). the proposed provisions to reflect those Summary and Explanation section (See 58 FR 16612, 16616 (3/30/1993)). advances. In addition, the Agency has below.) A standard is technologically feasible added or amended some provisions for In 1995, OSHA established the if the protective measures it requires easier comprehension and to better Maritime Advisory Committee for already exist, can be brought into protect employees. Occupational Safety and Health existence with available technology, or A number of the provisions in subpart (MACOSH) under section 7 of the OSH can be created with technology that can F were adopted in 1972 from existing Act (29 U.S.C. 656) to advise the Agency reasonably be expected to be developed. Federal and national consensus on issues relating to occupational safety American Textile Mfrs. Institute v. standards in effect at the time (e.g., and health standards in the shipyard OSHA (ATMI), 452 U.S. 490, 513 (1981); housekeeping, sanitation, medical and marine cargo handling (longshore) American Iron and Steel Institute v. services and first aid). Since then, those industries. On September 8, 1995, OSHA (AISI), 939 F.2d 975, 980 (D.C. consensus standards have been revised MACOSH discussed and approved the Cir 1991). and updated, several times in some recommendations and draft regulatory A standard is economically feasible if cases. OSHA has carefully reviewed the language that SESAC developed and industry can absorb or pass on the cost relevant consensus standards and, made additional recommendations, of compliance without threatening its where appropriate, proposes to which are discussed in the Summary long term profitability or competitive incorporate applicable requirements of and Explanation section below (Docket structure. See ATMI, 452 U.S. at 530 n. updated and revised standards. MACOSH 1995–1, Exs. 2; 102X, pp. 25, 55; AISI, 939 F.2d at 980. A standard is OSHA proposes to consolidate a 26). cost effective if the protective measures number of provisions to more clearly While OSHA is continuing to move it requires are the least costly of the indicate that they apply to shipyard toward a single set of standards for the available alternatives that achieve the employment and to make them easier to shipyard industry, OSHA has included same level of protection. ATMI, 453 U.S. understand and follow. First, the in part 1915 cross references to at 514 n. 32; International Union, UAW proposal consolidates requirements in applicable general industry standards v. OSHA (‘‘LOTO II’’), 37 F.3d 665, 668 part 1915 (e.g., housekeeping, rather than reprinting those standards in (D.C. Cir. 1994). sanitation, medical services and first this part. The proposal, for instance, Section 6(b)(7) of the OSH Act aid) for which there are also includes cross references to general authorizes OSHA to include among a requirements in general industry (part industry standards addressing accident standard’s requirements labeling, 1910) that shipyard employers must signs and tags and servicing multi-piece monitoring, medical testing and other follow. Although as a general rule part and single piece wheels. information gathering and transmittal 1915 standards prevail over any provisions (29 U.S.C. 655(b)(7)). different general industry standard, III. Pertinent Legal Authority All safety standards must be highly general industry standards apply to The purpose of the OSH Act is to protective. (See, 58 FR 16614–16615; shipyard employment where part 1915 ‘‘assure so far as possible every working LOTO II, 37 F.3d at 668.) Finally, standards do not address a particular

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72457

hazard or condition. For example, a employers to understand and comply general working condition provisions to number of provisions in the general with the requirements. all sectors of shipyard employment (i.e., industry sanitation standard (e.g., Second, the proposal cross references ship repair, shipbuilding, shipbreaking potable water, toilet facilities, vermin several general industry standards that and related employment). control) apply to shipyard employment already apply to shipyard employment As a result of the consolidation, the because the shipyard sanitation (e.g., § 1910.144 Safety Color Code for section numbers in subpart F would be standard (§ 1915.97) does not address Marking Physical Hazards). Finally, the these issues. OSHA believes that putting proposal consolidates into one section changed. To prevent confusion, the all of the sanitation requirements (§ 1915.80) the scope and application following table (Table 2) lists the applicable to shipyard employment into provisions for subpart F and clarifies proposed and corresponding existing one section will make it easier for that the proposal intends to apply the provisions, if there is one that applies:

TABLE 2.—TABLE OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND CORRESPONDING EXISTING PROVISIONS

Existing rule applicable to shipyard employ- Title of provision Proposed rule ment

Scope and application ...... § 1915.80 Each section of subpart F has a scope and application provision Housekeeping ...... § 1915.81 § 1915.91 and § 1910.141 Lighting ...... § 1915.82 § 1915.92 Utilities ...... § 1915.83 § 1915.93 Work in confined or isolated spaces ...... § 1915.84 § 1915.94 Vessel radar and radio transmitters ...... § 1915.85 § 1915.95 Lifeboats ...... § 1915.86 § 1915.96 Medical services and first aid ...... § 1915.87 § 1915.98 and § 1910.151 Sanitation ...... § 1915.88 § 1915.97 and § 1910.141 Control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout) ...... § 1915.89 § 1910.145 Safety color code for marking physical hazards ...... § 1915.90 § 1910.144 Accident prevention signs and tags ...... § 1915.91 No existing rule Retention of DOT markings, placards and labels ...... § 1915.92 § 1915.100 Motor vehicle safety equipment, maintenance, and operation ...... § 1915.93 No existing rule Servicing multi-piece and single-piece rim wheels ...... § 1915.94 No existing rule Definitions ...... § 1915.95 No existing rule

OSHA proposes to retain a number of with greater flexibility in determining provision. Although most of those provisions from the existing standards the most effective strategies for provisions indicate that the section with only minor editorial and technical controlling the hazards in question. The applies to shipbuilding, ship repairing, changes. OSHA believes, and SESAC proposal provides employers with and shipbreaking, some state that the agreed, that these provisions are objective criteria, where appropriate, to section, or part(s) of it, is limited to necessary to provide employees with assist them in complying with the certain shipyard operations. OSHA adequate protection from certain proposed requirements. For example, proposes to eliminate duplication of hazardous working conditions in OSHA proposes to replace the list of these provisions by consolidating them shipyards. This section does not address items that first aid kits must contain, into one scope and application section those provisions at length. Rather, the which was adopted more than 30 years that is applicable to the entire subpart. discussion in this section focuses on the ago and which SESAC said in 1993 was In addition, as SESAC recommended proposed revisions and additions, one outdated, with flexible performance- (Docket SESAC 1992–1, Ex. 100X, of the most important being the control based language and criteria employers pp. 110–112), OSHA proposes to apply of hazardous energy. must consider in determining the every section of subpart F uniformly to Finally, OSHA proposes to delete adequacy of those supplies. OSHA all of shipyard employment. ‘‘Shipyard some provisions from subpart F, in most believes this approach contemplates employment’’ is defined in § 1915.4(i) to cases because the hazards these changes in control strategy and allows mean ‘‘ship repairing, shipbuilding, requirements address are not present in for advances in technology and industry shipbreaking, and related employment.’’ shipyard employment. For example, the practice, thereby reducing the need to The proposal also adds language to existing provision § 1910.141(f) requires revise the standard when those changes clarify OSHA’s longstanding position that where working clothes are provided occur. that subpart F applies to shipyard by the employer and get wet or are OSHA requests comment on all employment ‘‘regardless of geographic washed between shifts, the employer aspects of the proposed rule. In order to location’’ of the shipyard activity. must ensure that the clothing is dry develop the most thorough and useful OSHA believes this is necessary to before reuse. However, information record possible, OSHA requests ensure that shipyard employers fully indicates that the provision is no longer interested persons to provide comments understand that the proposed subpart F necessary for shipyard employment on the questions raised throughout the requirements apply wherever employees because employers now provide preamble and to provide data and are performing ‘‘shipyard employment’’ disposable protective clothing. reasons to support those comments. activities. (OSHA recently added the Where possible, OSHA has expressed Section 1915.80 Scope and same language to the Fire Protection in the proposed requirements in Application Shipyards Standard, § 1915.501(b) (69 performance language. In many cases, FR 55668 (9/15/2004)). Thus, if OSHA replaced outdated specifications Each section in existing subpart F employees are performing shipyard with language that provides employers contains its own scope and application employment activities, including but

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72458 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

not limited to performing them onboard necessary protection wherever the that these conditions are maintained at vessels and vessel sections and in hazards that the proposed requirements all times. Because of the numerous landside facilities on navigable waters, are intended to address are present. To hazardous materials and substances in the proposed requirements would the extent that the hazard is not present use in shipyard operations, OSHA apply. Likewise, if employees are in a particular area of shipyard believes it is necessary to require performing shipyard employment employment, the proposed requirement shipyard employers to develop and activities at a location that is not would not apply. For example, the implement good housekeeping practices contiguous to a vessel, the proposed provisions in proposed § 1915.85 Vessel to protect employees from harm. As requirements also would apply. Radar and Radio Transmitters would noted above, shipyards experience The proposal also clarifies that not apply if a vessel’s radar is not being many injuries, such as slips and falls, subpart F applies to any employer, repaired or does not emit any radiation. which an effective housekeeping regardless of whether the employer The revisions OSHA proposes would program will help to reduce. owns the vessel or shipyard, whose make this subpart consistent with the Paragraphs (b) and (c)—In paragraph employees perform shipyard scope and application of other subparts (b) OSHA proposes to retain, with minor employment activities. The existing in part 1915 that OSHA has revised, editorial revisions, the existing policy will continue to apply under the including subpart I Personal Protective requirement (§ 1915.91(a)) that revised rule. OSHA notes that the Equipment in Shipyard Employment (61 employers ensure that walking and proposed change does not affect the FR 26322 (05/24/1996)) and subpart B working surfaces have adequate space Agency’s existing multi-employer Confined and Enclosed Spaces and for work and passage. To ensure that policy. Thus, if a contractor or Other Dangerous Atmospheres in space is adequate, OSHA proposes in subcontractor is hired to perform Shipyard Employment (59 FR 37816 paragraph (c) to retain the existing shipyard employment activities, the (07/25/1994)). requirement (§ 1915.91(a)) that proposed provision would apply when employers ensure walking and working Section 1915.81 Housekeeping employees are performing those surfaces such as aisles and passageways activities. On the other hand, the OSHA proposes to retain and combine be kept clear of tools, materials and proposal would not apply where the the housekeeping requirements equipment not in use. Specifically, the contractor’s employees perform non- applicable to shipyards (§ 1910.141(a)(3) proposal requires that equipment not shipyard employment activities. For and § 1915.91) and proposes to necessary to perform the job in progress example, the proposal would apply to a reorganize and simplify the provisions not be stored or located in an area that contractor whose employees are to make them easier to understand. For could interfere with walking and installing ductwork on vessel sections example, the proposal groups together working surfaces. This provision is or fabricating sheet metal in a shipyard similar requirements. The proposal also consistent with a SESAC facility, but would not extend to duct or simplifies the language in the existing recommendation (Docket SESAC 1992– sheet metal work done for other housekeeping section. Throughout the 3, Ex. 104X, pp. 110–112) that only employers and customers (e.g., proposed section OSHA uses the term tools, materials, and equipment installing heating ductwork for an ‘‘walking and working surfaces’’ in ‘‘necessary to complete the job in employer commercial building). place of the list of the specific areas and progress’’ be allowed to be kept out. Similarly, the proposal does not extend surfaces contained in the existing OSHA agrees with SESAC that all other to outside contractors or employers who section. In proposed § 1915.95, OSHA tools, materials, and equipment need to are at the shipyard but not performing defines ‘‘walking and working surfaces’’ be stored or located so that they do not shipyard employment activities, such as to mean any surface on which interfere with walking and working vending equipment suppliers or employees gain access or perform their surfaces and create hazards such as companies servicing portable toilet job duties or upon which employees are tripping, slipping or falling. MACOSH facilities. OSHA also notes that the required or allowed to walk or work in also supported the proposed addition proposal is not intended to cover inland the workplace. The definition contains (Docket MACOSH 1995–1, Ex. 100X, pp. manufacturing of boats or examples of areas and surfaces that the 63–64). Slips, trips and falls frequently manufacturing of parts used to perform term ‘‘walking and working surfaces’’ result in injuries in shipyards. As stated shipyard employment activities, which covers and includes all of the areas and above, according to the BLS data for are more accurately characterized as surfaces listed in the existing 2002, slips, trips and falls accounted for general industry manufacturing housekeeping section. OSHA believes 19 percent of all injuries and illnesses activities covered by Part 1910 that using the umbrella term should involving days away from work in ship standards (Exs. 16–9, OSHA Shipyard make the housekeeping section easier to and boat building and repairing. In Employment ‘‘Tool Bag’’ Directive, CPL understand. addition, floors, walkways, or ground 02–00–142; Ex. 19, Letter to John Proposed paragraphs (a) through (i) surfaces were cited as the source for 801 McKnight, National Marine establish specific requirements to injuries. Manufacturers Association (8/3/2001)). ensure walking and working surfaces Paragraph (d)—In proposed paragraph The proposed consolidation of the are free of hazards while paragraphs (j) (d), OSHA is retaining the existing scope provisions will simplify the and (k) minimize the risk of fire or requirement (§ 1910.141(a)(3)(ii)) that subpart. It eliminates duplicative combustion in shipyard work areas. employers ensure that the floor or deck provisions and allows OSHA to remove OSHA also proposes to add of every work area is maintained, so far from each section references to specific requirements to this section including as practicable, in a dry condition. Where shipyard operations. (This discussion of provisions on housekeeping procedures wet processes are used, OSHA is also the consolidation of the scope and and combustible scrap. retaining the existing requirement that application provisions eliminates the Paragraph (a)—In paragraph (a) OSHA drainage be maintained and that need to repeat, in the Preamble proposes to retain the existing employers provide false floors, discussion of each section, that the requirement that the employer maintain platforms, mats or other dry standing scope and application provisions are good housekeeping conditions to ensure places. Shipyard employment involves being deleted from each section). It also that walking and working surfaces do many wet processes, including gas- ensures that employees will be provided not create a hazard for employees and freeing, painting, hydroblasting and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72459

cleaning. This provision is necessary to such as scrap metal, broken equipment, such as welding and cutting are prevent employees from being exposed liquid wastes, tools, and empty performed, sparks generated by that to contaminated water and from containers. work could ignite the scrap. Fire standing for prolonged periods of time Paragraph (f)—In paragraph (f) OSHA prevention helps eliminate the hazards in water, both of which may result in is proposing to retain, with only minor created by the presence of combustible adverse health effects. However, OSHA changes, the existing requirement materials. OSHA recently published a also recognizes that in some instances it (§ 1915.91(d)) that the employer fire prevention standard (29 CFR Part may not be possible for employers to maintain free access to exits, fire-alarm 1915, subpart P) that contains fire provide a dry standing place. Therefore, boxes, and fire-fighting equipment. prevention measures that must be taken OSHA proposes to retain the existing OSHA proposes to add fire-call stations before and during hot work (69 FR language that employers need only to this list based on SESAC’s 55668–55708, (9/15/2004)). The provide dry standing places to the recommendation that access to this proposed requirement would reduce fire extent that it is practicable to do so. equipment is also essential for the hazards further and improve fire Where it is not, the proposal retains the protection and safe evacuation of protection in shipyards. employees (SESAC 1992–3, Ex. 104X, p. existing requirement that employers are Section 1915.82—Lighting responsible to provide any waterproof 117). footgear that may be necessary for Paragraph (g)—In paragraph (g) OSHA This section proposes minimum performing wet processes. Wearing is proposing to retain the existing requirements for illumination waterproof boots while performing wet requirement (§ 1915.91(c)) that slippery throughout shipyard employment. Many processes will protect employees from conditions on walkways or working of the proposed provisions are retained hazards associated with working in surfaces shall be eliminated as they from the existing requirements in standing water that may contain occur. The proposal also makes more § 1915.92. However, the proposal contaminants and will help to prevent explicit OSHA’s position that ice and reorganizes them for clarity into the slips and falls. snow are included among the types of following three paragraphs: (a) General slippery conditions that employers must Requirements; (b) Temporary Lights; Paragraph (e)—In paragraph (e), eliminate under the existing standard by and (c) Handheld Portable Lights. OSHA proposes to combine and adding language that such Paragraph (a) General Requirements— simplify four existing requirements to accumulations must be removed as they Proposed paragraph (a) sets forth keep walking and working surfaces clear occur. OSHA believes this clarifying requirements that apply to lighting in all of debris, including solid or liquid language is important since members of areas of shipyard employment. The wastes, and other objects that may SESAC raised questions about whether proposed general requirements would create a safety or health hazard for the existing standard covers these apply regardless of whether permanent employees, such as protruding nails, conditions (Docket SESAC 1992–3, Ex. or temporary lights are used. The splinters, loose boards, and unnecessary 104X, pp. 117–119). OSHA requests lighting intensity levels that would be holes and openings. Existing comment on this issue. required by table F–1 would not apply § 1915.91(a) requires that staging Paragraph (h)—In paragraph (h) to emergency lighting or portable platforms, ramps, stairways, walkways, OSHA proposes to retain the existing handheld lights. aisles and passageways on vessels or dry provision (§ 1915.91(b)) that In paragraph (a)(1) OSHA is proposing docks be kept clear of debris. Existing construction material be stacked in a to establish minimum illumination § 1915.91(b) requires that working areas manner that does not create a hazard requirements for specific areas and work on and immediately surrounding (e.g., trip) to employees. The proposal activities in shipyard employment to vessels, dry docks, graving docks and includes only non-substantive editorial ensure that employers have lighting that marine railways be kept free of debris. changes. allows employees to safely perform Existing § 1910.141(a)(4)(ii) requires that Paragraph (i)—In paragraph (i) OSHA work tasks. For instance, proposed all sweepings, solid or liquid wastes, is proposing to retain the existing Table F–1 specifies that general refuse, and garbage shall be removed in requirement (§ 1915.91(a)) that hoses landside areas such as corridors and such a manner as to avoid creating a and electrical service cords be hung walkways that employees pass through menace to health and as often as over or placed under walking and would be required to have an necessary or appropriate to maintain the working surfaces, or be covered by illumination intensity of at least five place of employment in a sanitary crossovers to prevent injury to lumens (foot candles). However, OSHA condition. In addition, existing employees and damage to the hoses and believes that higher illumination levels § 1910.141(a)(3)(iii) requires that in cords. The proposal contains only minor (i.e., 10 lumens) are necessary to work order to facilitate cleaning, every floor, editorial changes for clarity. safely in landside areas such as machine working place, and passageway shall be Paragraph (j)—In paragraph (j) OSHA and carpentry shops. In these areas kept free from protruding nails, proposes to retain the existing employees may be using hazardous splinters, loose boards, and unnecessary requirements (§ 1915.91(e)) that tools and equipment and performing holes and openings. The proposal, by flammable substances such as paint precision work. Likewise, higher using the term ‘‘walking and working thinners, solvents, rags and waste be illumination levels (i.e., 10 lumens) are surfaces’’, ensures that all areas in the stored in covered fire-resistant necessary in warehouses since it may be shipyard are kept clear. Keeping containers when not in use. necessary for employees to read warning walking and working surfaces clear will Paragraph (k)—Proposed paragraph labels on flammable or hazardous also help to ensure that employees have (k) adds a requirement that combustible substances and to safely operate lift adequate room to move safely to and scrap be removed from the work area as trucks and other equipment. from work areas and throughout the soon as possible to reduce fire hazards. According to the IMIS database, there workplace. OSHA intends that the term Shipyards have many small fires that have been four fatalities that may have ‘‘debris’’ continue to include bolts, nuts, are often due to the accumulation of been prevented had the employees been and welding rod tips as well as other combustible scrap materials. If working in an area that was provided objects and material that could create a combustible scrap is allowed to with adequate illumination. In one safety or health hazard to employees, accumulate in areas where hot work incident, an employee stepped into an

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72460 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

unguarded opening in the floor of a dark must be illuminated to at least 5 Ex. 100X, p. 84). OSHA has not adopted cargo deck and fell almost 20 feet to his lumens. Landside work areas such as this suggestion, because the Agency death at the bottom of the cargo hold. machine shops, electrical equipment believes that the existing and other At the time of the accident, the rooms, carpenter shops, lofts, tool proposed standards address this hazard. employee was walking across the dark rooms, warehouses, outdoor work areas, The existing and proposed provisions deck towards an open doorway, which changing rooms, showers, sewered toilet requiring temporary lights to be either provided the only illumination of the facilities and all eating, drinking and completely recessed or equipped with area. In another case, an employee break areas must be illuminated to 10 guards reduces the electrical hazard climbing down a ladder in an elevator lumens. First aid stations, infirmaries created by an exposed light bulb shaft that was dimly lit, fell 50 feet to and offices must be illuminated to 30 filament, and the electrical safe work his death. It is unclear whether the lumens. practices of § 1910 subpart S that apply employee could even see the bottom of OSHA notes that the Longshoring to temporary lights powered from the 130-foot shaft as he was descending. standard, 29 CFR 1918.92(a), requires landside sources address the hazards to In another case, an employee was generally that illumination for cargo employees repairing the temporary electrocuted when he was performing transfer operations be of a minimum lights. electrical repair work at night in a light intensity of five lumens. Where OSHA requests comment on this poorly illuminated area. An accident work tasks require more light to be recommendation, and whether it is investigation found there was performed safely, supplemental lighting needed, in light of other existing and ‘‘inadequate lighting’’ at the location must be provided. That approach does proposed regulatory provisions that deal where the employee was working (Ex. not provide the guidance that SESAC with lighting, electrical safety, and 14). Although the investigation requested while proposed Table F–1 guarding of temporary lights. confirmed that the controlling circuit provides for those situations in which Paragraph (b) Temporary Lights— breaker was closed, another switch was supplemental lighting may be necessary. Proposed paragraph (b) retains, with found in an open position, possibly OSHA does not intend to require that minor editorial changes, the existing because there was not enough light to employers provide additional lighting provisions on temporary lights read the switch. The existing rule where natural light provides the (§ 1915.92(f)), including light guards, specifies that work areas must be necessary illumination level. However, grounding, insulation, and splicing. ‘‘adequately illuminated’’ (§ 1915.92(a)). where natural light does not provide the Proposed paragraph (b)(1) is similar to The proposed rule clarifies the existing required level (e.g., at dusk), the the existing requirement requirement by setting forth specific employer must provide additional (§ 1915.92(b)(1)) that temporary lights illumination levels for various shipyard lighting and Table F–1 specifies the that do not have bulbs that are ‘‘deeply’’ work locations (proposed § 1915.82 appropriate minimum levels of recessed must have guards to prevent Table F–1). Had the employee’s work illumination. accidental contact. Guarding of non- location been lit to the proposed levels, OSHA solicits comments on the recessed bulbs is necessary to protect the employee may have been able to see proposal as well as alternative employees from being burned, or cut by that the oil switch was still open and approaches such as the one used in the broken bulbs, and to prevent close it prior to starting his repair work. Longshoring Standard or the combustible materials from igniting. SESAC recommended that OSHA add requirements of the ANSI/IESNA However, paragraph (b)(1) proposes to specific illumination requirements to standard. Are the proposed lighting require that temporary lights be guarded this section (Docket SESAC–1992–1, Ex. intensities adequate? Does the table if they are not ‘‘completely’’ recessed. 100X, 1992, p. 113), and the Agency adequately address all areas of shipyard The existing provision only requires agrees that the table provides useful and employment? If not, what areas need to guarding if lights are not ‘‘deeply’’ simple assistance for employers. The be added? recessed. Unless a temporary light is illumination specifications in proposed In paragraph (a)(2), OSHA proposes to completely recessed, there is a risk that Table F–1 are drawn from illumination retain unchanged the existing the light could be damaged or broken, tables in the Construction Illumination requirement (§ 1915.92(e)) that matches thus creating a hazard for employees (§ 1926.56) and Hazardous Waste and open flame devices may not be used (e.g., electrical, laceration, burn). A Operations (§ 1910.120) standards, and as sources of light. OSHA proposes to guard is necessary to control those in the national consensus standard for place this provision with the general hazards. OSHA believes the proposed industrial lighting (Ex. 3–8, ANSI/ requirements to reinforce its intent that language provides employers with IESNA RP–9–01–2001 Recommended matches and open flames are not to be clearer and more accurate guidance on Practice for Lighting in Industrial used for light for any purpose, including when the hazards this provision Facilities). The proposal revises and emergencies, or anywhere in the addresses are present and must be simplifies the tables from those shipyard, regardless of whether controlled. OSHA requests comment on standards to make Table F–1 more permanent, temporary or handheld the proposed provision. What is your applicable to shipyard employment portable lighting is available. Using current practice? Should OSHA require conditions and activities. matches and open flame devices, such that all temporary lights be guarded? OSHA is proposing that each area of as burning torches, for lighting or heat Paragraph (b)(2) proposes that the workplace be illuminated according is not safe or practical for a number of employers equip temporary lights with to the following intensities. In general reasons. They are unreliable, could be electric cords ‘‘with sufficient capacity areas, such as exits, accessways, stairs blown out easily, could endanger to carry the electric load.’’ The existing and walkways, the area must be employees by creating a fire hazard, and standard (§ 1915.92(b)(2)) requires the illuminated with at least 3 lumens on do not provide adequate lighting use of ‘‘heavy duty’’ electric cords. The vessels and vessel sections and 5 intensities. OSHA Construction Electrical standards lumens on landside. In areas such as SESAC also recommended adding a are similar to the existing standard, landside tunnels, shafts, vaults, requirement that only a ‘‘qualified requiring that cords for portable tools pumping stations and underground person’’ be permitted to replace or cap and appliances be designed for ‘‘hard or work areas, and all assigned work areas unguarded, damaged bulbs that have extra-hard usage’’ (§ 1926.405(a)(2)(j)). on any vessel or vessel section, the area exposed filaments (Docket SESAC 1991, The construction standard includes a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72461

note listing various types of hard or splices are used. When a splice is requirement that employers provide and extra-hard cords that meet the National necessary on an electrical cord, the ensure handheld portable lights are Electrical Code (ANSI/NEPA 70, Article current may create a surplus of energy used to enter or work in any area that 400, Table 400–4). or ‘‘hot spot’’ at the splice junction that (1) does not have permanent or OSHA believes the proposed language is greater than the current for which the temporary lighting, (2) where such more accurately identifies the type of cord was designed. Requiring that the lighting is not working, or (3) where cord employers must provide to ensure rated capacity of the insulation exceed such lighting is not readily accessible. employees are not exposed to electrical the capacity of the cable ensures that ‘‘Readily accessible,’’ for purposes of hazards, and thus, provides greater employees will be protected if they this provision, means that the light protection for employees. The fact that touch or come into contact with the switch or other means of activation is a cord is ‘‘heavy duty’’ does not splice. The additional insulation located in close proximity to the necessarily mean that it has sufficient capacity also ensures that hot spots do entrance to the area. For example, where capacity to carry the electric load. In not start burning or ignite combustible an employee would have to travel across addition, OSHA believes the proposal materials in the area. a long work area or climb steps in the provides employers with greater OSHA requests comment on the dark to turn on permanent lights, those flexibility in meeting the requirements proposed revision. Does the proposed lights are not readily accessible. In such of the standard. The proposal ensures requirement provide sufficient cases, the employee would have to use that employers may use whatever type protection for employees? Is weather a a handheld portable light to enter the of cord is sufficient to safely carry the factor in determining what insulation to area. OSHA requests comment on the electric load. use? In your establishment and proposed provision. In your Proposed paragraph (b)(3) retains industry, what practices are followed establishment, when are employees unchanged the existing requirements regarding insulation of splices? Should provided with and required to use (§ 1915.92(b)(2)) that connections and OSHA propose a more specific handheld portable lights to enter an insulation used on temporary lights be requirement, for example that splices area? Are there other situations where maintained in a safe condition. Implicit have insulation at 11⁄2 times greater than handheld portable lights are needed? in this provision is the requirement that that of the cable? In three different fatalities reported in the employer check to see that Proposed paragraph (b)(8) retains the the IMIS database, employees who were connections and insulation are in existing requirement (§ 1915.92(c)) that working in areas where the lighting was proper working order and replace them exposed, non-current-carrying metal not working, fell to their deaths walking when they are broken, cracked or parts of temporary lights be grounded. It in dark areas. In one instance, an damaged. also retains the requirement that employee who was trying to restore In paragraph (b)(4), OSHA proposes to grounding be provided either through a power to the temporary lighting stepped clarify the existing requirement third wire in the cable that contains the off of the coaming and fell (§ 1915.92(b)(2)) to prohibit temporary circuit conductors or through a separate approximately 25 feet to the bottom of light stringers, as well as temporary wire that is grounded at the source of the hold. lights, from being suspended solely by the current. OSHA also proposes to Proposed paragraph (c)(2) is similar to their electric cords, unless they are include the existing provision requiring the existing requirement (§ 1915.92(d)) designed by the manufacturer to be used that grounding be done in accordance that where temporary lighting from in that way. When any type of lights and with the requirements of § 1915.132(b) sources outside the vessel or vessel wiring are not suspended properly, subpart H, Tools and Related section is the only means of placing them under tension the Equipment. illumination, the employer shall ensure manufacturer did not design the electric Paragraph (c) Handheld Portable that handheld portable lights are cord to take, the cord can fray, break, or Lights—Proposed paragraph (c) available to provide illumination for become damaged. addresses the use of handheld portable safe movement of employees. This Proposed paragraphs (b)(5) and (6) lights in work areas that do not have provision is needed because temporary retain, with non-substantive changes, permanent or temporary lighting or such lighting could fail, making it difficult the existing requirements in lighting is not working or is not readily and hazardous for employees exiting an § 1915.92(f). Proposed paragraph (b)(5) accessible. area of the vessel. The proposal requires requires that lighting stringers not To ensure that employees do not enter that the employer ensure that the overload branch circuits. Proposed unlighted or dark areas, paragraph (c)(1) portable lights are handheld so paragraph (b)(6) requires that branch requires that the employer provide employees are able to take the lights circuits be equipped with over-current employees with handheld portable with them to light their way as they protection whose capacity does not lights and ensure that such lights are move about and exit the space safely. exceed the rated current carrying used whenever employees enter those The proposal also makes explicit that capacity of the cord used. OSHA areas. The proposal simplifies the the employer must ensure that handheld believes that both measures are current requirements (§ 1915.92(d) and portable lights are readily available in necessary to provide an adequate (e)), by combining them into one the immediate area where employees measure of safety from electrical and provision and clarifying that the are working. Implicit in the proposal is fire hazards associated with circuit requirement is applicable to all the obligation that the employer provide overloading. unlighted areas in shipyards, regardless handheld portable lights in numbers Proposed paragraph (b)(7) revises the of whether they are on vessels, vessel that are adequate to ensure that all existing standard by requiring that sections or landside. employees are able to move about and splices have insulation that ‘‘exceeds’’ In response to a MACOSH exit the area safely. OSHA requests that of the cable. The existing provision recommendation (Ex. 1–2), proposed comment on the proposed provision. allows the use of splices where the paragraph (c)(1) also clarifies in Should OSHA apply this provision to insulation is ‘‘equal’’ to that of the cable. objective terms the existing prohibition any area where landside or shore-based OSHA believes the revisions are that employees not enter ‘‘dark spaces’’ lighting provides the only illumination? necessary to ensure that employees are without handheld portable lights. The Should OSHA include an exception to fully protected from electrical hazards if proposal replaces that term with the the rule when natural sunlight suffices?

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72462 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Proposed paragraph (c)(3) retains and Employers are free to ascertain the prevent chafing. The proposal requires simplifies the existing requirement critical information from a responsible that ‘‘short bights’’ be used when (§ 1915.92(e)) on the use of handheld vessel’s representative, a contractor or hanging steam hoses. OSHA believes the portable lights in any area that is not any other person who is qualified by proposed language more clearly and gas-free. In such areas, the proposal training, knowledge or experience to directly specifies the measures would require that the employer ensure make that determination. necessary to prevent chafing and reduce that only ‘‘explosion-proof, self- In paragraphs (a)(1) through (3), tension on the hose and its fittings. contained’’ handheld portable lights are OSHA proposes to simplify the existing SESAC recommended this change used (or other equipment approved by requirements (§ 1915.93(a)(1)) for (Docket SESAC 1992–3, Ex. 104X, p. a nationally recognized testing outside systems that supply steam to a 123) because they said the use of short laboratory (NRTL)). Although the vessel’s steam piping system. Proposed bights better protects steam hoses from existing standard requires the same, paragraph (a)(1) requires that a pressure damage. stakeholders must go to another section gauge and a relief valve be installed at Proposed paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of part 1915 (§ 1915.13(b)(9)) to find out the point where the steam hose of the retain and divide into separate what type of lights they must provide outside steam source joins a vessel’s provisions the existing requirements to when the area is not gas-free. The steam piping system. Proposed protect steam hoses from damage and to proposal adds the language from the paragraph (a)(2) requires that the relief protect employees from injury from cross-referenced section, thus valves of outside steam systems be set steam hoses (§ 1915.93(a)(4)). In eliminating the need to look to the other to relieve excess steam and be capable paragraph (b)(3), OSHA proposes that section. The proposal also carries of relieving steam at a pressure that does steam hoses be protected from damage. forward the note to existing not exceed the safe working pressure of Steam hoses can be damaged when § 1915.13(b)(9) that equipment approved the vessel’s steam piping system in its equipment and material are moved by a NRTL for the class and division of present condition. Proposed paragraph through walking and working areas. the location to be used will meet the (a)(3) requires that there must not be any Employees could be seriously injured if requirements of this paragraph. (OSHA means of disconnecting the relief valve a damaged hose suddenly releases notes that the proposed requirement from the system that it protects. steam. would apply in non-gas-free areas In paragraph (a)(4), OSHA proposes to Proposed paragraph (b)(4) revises the regardless of whether proposed revise the existing requirement existing requirement that steam hoses paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) also apply.) (§ 1915.93(a)(1)) on visibility and and temporary piping passing through accessibility of pressure gauges and walking or working areas be shielded to Section 1915.83 Utilities relief valves of steam supply systems by protect employees from injury due to The proposed section on utilities adding a requirement that such gauges accidental contact. The existing retains, with minor clarifications, the and valves also be ‘‘kept in legible provisions only require shielding of existing requirements of § 1915.93 and condition.’’ OSHA believes this addition steam hoses and piping that pass reorganizes them for clarity into four will address concerns SESAC members through ‘‘normal work areas’’ paragraphs: (a) Steam supply systems; raised that gauges and valves often (§ 1915.93(a)(4)). The proposed language (b) Steam hoses; (c) Electric shore cannot be read because they are too expands coverage and provides power; and (d) Heat lamps. SESAC dirty to be readable or the print is too employees with greater protection recommended retaining these small (Docket SESAC 1992–2, Ex. 102X, because it ensures that hoses and piping provisions and did not propose any pp. 94–96). OSHA agrees that gauges passing through areas and spaces where changes (Docket SESAC 1992–3, Ex. must be visible, accessible and legible in employees walk or pass through to 104X, pp. 88–96). The Agency agrees order to determine accurately whether reach work areas are also shielded to that these provisions are necessary to the working pressure of the steam protect employees. protect employees from hazards supply system is safe. Paragraph (c) Electric Shore Power— associated with unchecked release of In paragraph (a)(5), OSHA proposes to In paragraph (c) the Agency proposes to steam and with excessive wearing, add a requirement that relief valves be retain, with minor revisions, the tearing, and chafing of steam hoses that positioned or placed in a location where existing requirements (§ 1915.93(b)) could compromise the integrity of they will not cause injury if they are addressing the actions employers must components. activated. For example, orienting or take prior to energizing a vessel’s Paragraph (a) Steam Supply System— positioning the relief valve to vent away circuits when electricity is supplied Proposed paragraph (a) requires that the from employees is one way to protect from a landside power source. OSHA employer ensure that the vessel’s steam them from being scalded and burned if believes that the proposed performance piping system has a safe working a valve is tripped by high pressure. language improves the clarity of the pressure prior to supplying steam from Paragraph (b) Steam Hoses—Proposed requirements. For example, the proposal an outside source to the vessel. paragraph (b) retains, with some changes the paragraph title to ‘‘Electric In paragraph (a) OSHA proposes to revisions, the existing requirements for Shore Power’’ from ‘‘Electric Power’’ to delete the existing requirement that steam hoses (§ 1915.93(a)(2)–(4)). emphasize that the provisions address employers must ascertain the steam Proposed paragraph (b)(1) requires that the actions that are necessary to protect system working pressure from the employer ensure that all steam hoses employees from the hazards of remote ‘‘responsible vessel’s representatives, and fittings have a safety factor of at power carried by electric cables or wires having knowledge of the condition of least five—which is the same safety onto a vessel, which differ from other the plant.’’ In its place, OSHA proposes factor as in the existing standard electrical hazards such as hand-held to provide employers with greater (§ 1915.93(a)(2)). powered tools. flexibility in determining the most In paragraph (b)(2), OSHA proposes to Proposed paragraph (c)(1) retains effective way to meet the requirements revise the existing requirement unchanged the existing requirement of this provision, while keeping (§ 1915.93(a)(3)) on hanging steam hoses (§ 1915.93(b)(1)(i)) that, prior to employers responsible for ensuring that in bights. The existing rule requires that energizing the vessel’s circuits, the steam system is safe before the weight of the steam hoses must be employers ensure the vessel is grounded supplying steam from an outside source. ‘‘relieved by appropriate lines’’ to if it is in dry dock.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72463

In paragraph (c)(2), OSHA proposes to • In 2002, an employee was working comply with this requirement. One revise the existing requirement alone in the plenum on the starboard method is using two-way radios. (§ 1915.93(b)(1)(ii)) to require that, prior side of the A/B deck on a Navy vessel. Another is frequent visits by the to energization, employers ensure that Management stated that no one had employer or employer’s designee to the circuits are in safe condition. The checked on him often enough to notice confined space or the isolated area. If proposal also deletes the existing he was missing until someone noticed visits to the work area are used, it is language requirement that employers his body floating in the water nearby. essential that the employer have a visual ascertain such information from a • In 2000, an employee was working check of the employee rather than ‘‘responsible vessel’s representative.’’ on the accommodation ladder on the relying on power tool noise. Some OSHA believes the proposal provides MV Cape Henry when he apparently fell power tools can continue to run even employers with greater flexibility to and drowned. He was not found for 11 after an employee is injured or disabled. determine the most effective procedure days. • Paragraph (b)—In paragraph (b) OSHA for checking the safety of circuits. In 2000, a crew was working on a proposes to add a new requirement that In paragraph (c)(3), OSHA proposes to cargo transfer crane barge welding metal the employer, at the end of each shift, retain unchanged the existing grommets under the crane tracks on the account for each employee who is requirement (§ 1915.93(b)(1)(iii)) that deck of the barge. One employee working in a confined space or alone in circuits to be energized must be climbed into a hold and was overcome an isolated location. This provision equipped with overcurrent protection by lack of oxygen. The employee was would ensure that employers ascertain that does not exceed the rated current- eventually found and later died. that each employee has returned safely • In 1998, a five-man crew was carrying capacity of the conductors. from working in those areas, and if not, working on a barge, refitting it for use Paragraph (d) Heat Lamps—Proposed to take immediate action to locate the on the Panama Canal. One of the paragraph (d) would require that all heat missing employee to render first aid or employees was working alone on the lamps, including the face, be equipped any other needed assistance. OSHA port side of the vessel installing the with surround-type guards to prevent added this provision after reviewing pilot house when he fell into the water. contact with the bulb, which could shipyard fatality reports that indicated result in employee burns or the igniting The remainder of the crew did not know some injured employees were not of combustible material. The proposal that the employee had been missing discovered until long after their shifts expands the existing requirement until they found him dead in the water had ended. OSHA recognizes that this (§ 1915.93(c)), which is limited to at a later time. provision may not prevent every fatality infrared heat lamps and does not fully • In 1995, an employee was working associated with confined spaces and address contact hazards since it does alone as a shipyard dock watchman isolated work areas, but the Agency not require that the lamp face be when he apparently fell from the believes it will help to increase guarded. OSHA believes these changes gangway between the ship and the dock survivability when an accident or injury are necessary because shipyards use a wall to the bottom of the dry dock. The occurs. variety of heat lamps and because fires unconscious employee was not found are a significant source of accidents until the relief watchman came on duty OSHA requests comment on the onboard vessels. In addition, employees and summoned help. The emergency proposed provision. Specifically, OSHA can be seriously burned if they come in team who arrived found the employee requests comment on whether the contact with a lamp face, which the suffering from head and limb fractures section should be limited to employees guarding will prevent. and internal injuries. The employee working alone in either a confined or later died of those injuries. isolated space. Should OSHA address Section 1915.84 Work in Confined or • In 1993, an employee was killed the hazards associated with working in Isolated Spaces working alone while welding an confined spaces in subpart B confined The proposal retains, with revisions, overhead lap of steel plate to the and enclosed spaces instead of subpart the existing requirements (§ 1915.94) to underside of a vessel in dry dock. While F? In your establishment and industry, protect employees working in confined standing on a concrete dry dock apron, are employees working in confined spaces or alone in isolated locations. approximately 14 feet wide by 49 feet spaces or alone in isolated spaces The proposal also retains the existing long, the employee apparently walked checked frequently during the workshift exception in § 1915.51(c)(3) for welding, off the end of it into the water and and accounted for at the end of the cutting and heating in confined spaces drowned. A coworker had gone home to workshift? OSHA requests data and where, under certain conditions, an take care of personal business, and there information on any injuries, fatalities, or employee must be stationed outside the was no one there to rescue the near-misses that have occurred during confined space to maintain employee. the last five years due to an employee communication and render aid if • In 1992, two employees were working in a confined space or alone in necessary. After reviewing the existing cutting bulkheads using a torch in a an isolated area. If any incidents have rule, SESAC recommended retaining the small compartment on a drilling rig. The occurred, what measures have been requirements (Docket SESAC 1992–2, hose failed just inside the manways and instituted to ensure that employees Ex. 102X, p. 99). OSHA agrees with ignited, trapping both employees inside working in these areas are safe? SESAC that these provisions are the compartment until the end of the OSHA also requests comment on necessary to reduce employee deaths in shift, about one hour. There were no whether the section should require that shipyard employment. scheduled checks on these employees, employers establish a system or some Since 1987, thirteen fatalities have and one employee died as a result. form of a signal to indicate when a been reported in the OSHA IMIS Paragraph (a)—Proposed paragraph (a) single employee enters a confined space database where employees were retains the requirement that the or a cofferdam to perform work. For working alone in isolated areas in employer make frequent checks during example, should OSHA require shipyards and were not discovered until each workshift to ensure the safety of employers to have a system where after they had died from their injuries any employee working in a confined employees leave their picture (Ex. 13). Following are some of those space or alone in an isolated location. identification (or some other easily incidents. There are many ways employers can identifiable flag) outside the entrance to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72464 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

alert other employees that someone is necessary for two reasons. First, any sternhook failed, killing one employee inside working? employee, including a repair technician, and seriously injuring the two others. could be injured or killed if the radar or The proposal prohibits hoisting Section 1915.85 Vessel Radar and radio transmitter releases energy or if employees in lifeboats under any Radio Transmitters radiation is emitted from the radar circumstances. Such a requirement The proposed section retains, with system while the employee is working would have prevented these accidents. minor revisions, the existing on or near that equipment. The Paragraph (a)—Proposed paragraph (a) requirements in § 1915.95 to protect proposed revision provides uniform simplifies the existing provision employees from hazards (e.g., hazardous protection for all employees working on (§ 1915.96(a)) to emphasize that the energy, radiation) associated with radar or near such equipment. Second, this employer must ensure that before and radio transmitters onboard vessels. revision would ensure that employees employees work in or on a lifeboat, Although the scope of the proposed servicing radar systems and radio either in a stowed or suspended section is expanded to apply to transmitters follow the procedures for position, that the lifeboat is secured shipbreaking, OSHA notes that it is very controlling hazardous energy sources independently of the releasing gear. unlikely that radar and other radiation (lockout/tagout) in proposed § 1915.89 Securing the lifeboat prevents it from emitting equipment are still operational to protect themselves and other falling if the releasing gear is when shipbreaking operations are employees working in the area. The accidentally tripped or the davits move. performed. Therefore, if the hazards this Agency believes that shipyards It also prevents lifeboats that are stowed section seeks to address are not present, generally follow these precautions on chocks from capsizing. the requirements would not apply. currently, and thus this provision would Paragraph (b)—Proposed paragraph Paragraph (a)—Proposed paragraph (a) not alter work practices in this area. (b) expands the protection afforded by revises the existing requirement Paragraph (c)—Proposed paragraph (c) the existing provision (§ 1915.96(b)) by (§ 1915.95(a)) to ensure that no retains unchanged the existing prohibiting employees from being in a employee, whether radio repair provision (§ 1915.95(b)) requiring that lifeboat at any time while it is being technician or other employee, is the employer schedule testing of radar hoisted. The existing requirement only allowed to work on the radar, radio or radio at a time when (1) no work is prohibits employees from being in transmitter, mast, king post, or other in progress aloft, or (2) personnel can be lifeboats when they are hoisted ‘‘into area closely located, unless the radar cleared a ‘‘minimum safe distance’’ from the final stowed position.’’ As the and radio transmitter are secured and the danger area. The proposal also discussion of fatal shipyard accidents made incapable of releasing hazardous retains the requirement that the shows, the hazards associated with the energy or emitting radiation. Although employer follow the minimum safe hoisting of lifeboats (e.g., falling) are the existing provision prohibits work in distance established for the type, model, present any time they are hoisted. The areas near the radar or radio transmitter and power of the equipment. SESAC proposed provision will provide unless the equipment is made incapable recommended retaining the existing employees with protection whenever of emitting radiation, the provision does provisions (Docket SESAC 1992–1, Ex. the hazard is present. OSHA requests not address all the hazards of radio and 100X, pp. 118–130; Docket SESAC comments on the proposed revision. radar transmitters including the 1992–2, Ex. 102X, pp. 97–99). Paragraph (c)—Proposed paragraph (c) energization of equipment. For example, SESAC also recommended that OSHA retains the existing requirement an employee working aloft on a mast include sonar testing and repair in this (§ 1915.96(c)) that the employer not could be injured or even killed if a section (Docket SESAC 1992–1, Ex. permit employees to work on the rotating radio antenna moves and strikes 100X, pp. 118–130). OSHA requests outboard side of any lifeboat that is the employee. comments on whether the testing and stowed on its chocks unless the lifeboat Paragraph (b)—Proposed paragraph repair of sonar should be included. is secured to prevent it from swinging (b) revises the existing provision to What are the potential hazards to outboard. If the lifeboat is not secured require that prior to servicing, repairing employees in testing and repairing prior to employees working on the or testing any radar or radio transmitter, sonar? In your establishment and outboard side of it, the lifeboat could the employer must ensure that industry, have employees been injured, swing out and strike the employee, hazardous energy is controlled in killed, or exposed to radiation while causing him or her to fall. accordance with the proposed testing, repairing or working near sonar requirements of § 1915.89 Control of equipment? What precautions are taken Section 1915.87 Medical Services and Hazardous Energy. The existing to ensure that employees are protected First Aid provision only requires that the from these hazards? Proposed § 1915.87 sets out equipment be ‘‘appropriately tagged’’ requirements for medical services, first (§ 1915.95(a)). However, OSHA believes Section 1915.86 Lifeboats aid, and lifesaving equipment. Shipyard that more detailed lockout/tagout The proposed section retains and employment has high accident rates. procedures are needed to ensure that revises the existing requirements The provisions in this section are employees are fully protected from the (§ 1915.96) for working in or on intended to prevent workplace movement or start up of equipment and lifeboats. Several lifeboat fatalities have accidents from resulting in fatality and the release of hazardous energy. Tagging occurred in the shipbuilding and repair serious injury by increasing the the equipment without complying with industry. In 1993, for example, two survivability of life-threatening injuries the rest of the proposed lockout/tagout employees being hoisted in a lifeboat and mitigating the severity of injuries. program and procedures does not were thrown into a river and drowned The proposal combines and revises, ensure that employees will be fully because the boat was not adequately where necessary, the existing standards protected, especially those working in secured. When the boat was released the on medical services and first aid that are multi-employer worksites or in hoist lines were not sufficient to bear applicable to shipyards (§§ 1910.151 situations where ship’s crew are the weight and shock of the falling and 1915.98). OSHA adopted both present. lifeboat. In 2004, three employees being standards, pursuant to section 6(a) of The additional protections in lifted onto a newly-constructed floating the OSH Act, from the established proposed paragraphs (a) and (b) are oil rig were dropped when the rig’s Federal occupational safety and health

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72465

standards in effect at the time. (The qualified attendants and trained first aid employers must ensure that first aid and provisions in § 1910.151 apply to providers must be ‘‘close at hand’’ to medical services are initiated within shipyards to the extent that the section any area of the shipyard while the first three to five minutes of the discovery or addresses hazards and working aid kits provision only requires that kits report of an injury? conditions that § 1915.98 does not. See be furnished for and kept close to each Paragraph (b) Advice and Ex.16–9, OSHA’s Tool Bag Directive.) vessel. Consultation—In paragraph (b), OSHA Paragraph (a) General Requirement— OSHA notes that employers will need proposes to retain, with technical In paragraph (a), OSHA proposes a to consider various workplace factors in changes, the existing requirement in general requirement that employers determining whether first aid and § 1910.151(a) that employers ensure that ensure that medical services and first medical services are readily accessible, health care professionals are readily aid for employees are ‘‘readily such as the size and position of each available for advice and consultation on accessible.’’ For purposes of this work location; the number of employees matters of workplace health. section, readily accessible means that working at the work location; the nature OSHA is proposing to replace two medical services and first aid are of the hazards to which employees may terms in the existing requirement. The capable of being reached quickly when be exposed; and the distance between term ‘‘plant health’’ would be changed employees need them, or medical work locations and clinics (on-site or to ‘‘workplace health,’’ to make the service and first aid can be brought off-site), hospitals and rescue squads. provision more appropriate to quickly to the employee, and there are Applying these factors, accidents shipyards, and ‘‘health care no obstacles to gaining quick access. resulting in severe bleeding or electrical professionals’’ would replace the term The purpose of this provision is shock resulting in heart or breath ‘‘medical personnel.’’ OSHA proposes to twofold. First, it would establish stoppage must be treated within a very define health care professional to mean uniform criteria applicable to all of the short time (optimally within three to a physician or any other health care first aid and medical services specified four minutes) to increase the chances of provider whose legally permitted scope in the section, ensuring that these a positive outcome. To the extent that of practice allows the provider to services are available and close enough these types of accident risks are present independently provide or be delegated to the injured employee so effective in shipyards, such as servicing electrical the responsibility to provide some or all intervention can be provided. Second, systems where there is a risk of of the advice or consultation this section in the case of serious or life-threatening energization or start up, the employer requires. The proposal would allow injury, it would require employers to must ensure that necessary first aid is employers to consult with any health have steps in place to ensure that close enough to maximize the injured care professional (e.g., physician, additional emergency medical employee’s survivability. For example, osteopath, physician’s assistant, nurse, intervention is readily accessible. The where employees are at risk of electrical EMT, etc.) whose license, registration or provision also addresses SESAC’s shock, it is necessary to have first aid certificate authorizes them to provide concerns that first aid providers be able providers located in that work area so such assistance and advice. In some to reach injured employees quickly cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instances, a nurse or physician’s enough to render effective assistance. can be started quickly. assistant at an on-site clinic may be able Uniform criteria for all first aid and With regard to the second purpose, to provide the requested advice and medical services are necessary because the proposed provision would require consultation. Employers are also free to their components, primarily first aid employers to ensure ready accessibility use local medical clinics or specialists. providers and first aid supplies, are to additional medical services such as The key is that the health care interrelated. They both must be readily rescue squads and ambulances. OSHA professional must be readily available to accessible for intervention to be notes that some shipyards, primarily provide advice and consultation when effective. It is not effective to require larger ones, already have taken these needed. that first aid kits be situated at every steps by establishing their own on-site Paragraph (c) First Aid Providers— work location without a parallel medical clinics and ambulance or Proposed paragraph (c)(1) revises the requirement to have trained employees rescue squads. The proposed provision existing provisions (§ 1915.98(a)) on the at the work location who are capable of does not require shipyard employers to required number and location of first using those supplies. Conversely, on- have on-site clinics, ambulance or aid providers and updates the site trained first aid providers cannot rescue squads, but at a minimum, it requirements on their qualifications to provide effective assistance if first aid requires employers to implement a more fully address the needs and supplies are too far away to be accessed system to ensure that emergency conditions present in shipyards. OSHA quickly. Thus, establishing uniform services such as local rescue squads or proposes that employers ensure there criteria will help to ensure that the ambulance services are readily are adequate numbers of employees to needed components of first aid and accessible when needed. The render first aid at each work location medical services are in place to provide employer’s plan needs to factor in during each workshift. Section effective intervention when needed. reasonably foreseeable delays, such as 1915.98(a) currently requires that where Uniform provisions will also help to railroad tracks near the shipyard a first aid room with a qualified simplify the section and make it easier entrance that could be blocked when attendant is not ‘‘close at hand,’’ there to understand and comply with. Finally, rescue squads need to access injured must be at least one employee ‘‘close at the uniform criterion addresses employees in the shipyard. hand’’ to administer first aid. SESAC inconsistency concerns that SESAC OSHA requests comment on this raised two concerns about this suggested exist in the current provision. In your establishment and provision. They said the language ‘‘close requirements. SESAC pointed out that industry, what measures are in place to at hand’’ was too vague. In addition, the existing standard establishes ensure that first aid and medical they expressed concern that first aid different criteria for different types of services are readily accessible? Should providers would not be able to reach first aid and medical services (Docket the final standard specify a maximum injured employees quickly enough if SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, pp. 167–173). time within which first aid and medical they were not located at shipyard work For example, SESAC pointed out that in services must be available? For example, locations. For example, some SESAC existing § 1915.98(a) first aid rooms, should the final standard specify that members said local emergency services

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72466 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

can be delayed in reaching shipyards portable outlet box. The IMIS abstract intend the term to mean a single work due to traffic situations, such as being indicates that coworkers summoned area. A shipyard may have hundreds of stopped at train crossings. To resolve emergency medical personnel to the work areas and only one or a few these concerns, SESAC recommended worksite, which appears to suggest that employees may work in any one area. that there be first aid providers at there was no one at the worksite trained Rather, OSHA intends a shipyard work shipyard work locations regardless of to provide CPR to ‘‘buy time’’ until location to refer to a group of work areas whether first aid rooms or hospitals are offsite emergency personnel arrived. that are clustered together and in near located nearby (Docket SESAC 1993–1, There also is no indication how long it proximity to each other. For instance, Ex. 100X, pp. 166–173). took for emergency personnel to arrive. work areas in a small, concentrated Based on SESAC’s recommendation, When the personnel did arrive, they shipyard may constitute a single work OSHA proposes in paragraph (c)(1) that transported the injured employee to a location, even though some may be employers ensure that there are hospital, but he died. Had the proposed located on a vessel and others on employees qualified to provide first aid provisions been in place, there would landside. By contrast, a large shipyard at each work location during each have been first aid providers at that that has multiple piers, docks, large workshift. OSHA agrees with SESAC work location to begin CPR immediately vessels, and landside facilities is likely that the proposed provision is necessary to preserve the employee’s brain and to be considered to have multiple work and will be effective in ensuring that heart function during those critical first locations. This is because shipyard work first aid is provided quickly enough to minutes while offsite emergency areas are more likely to be spread across maximize survivability and prevent personnel are summoned (proposed a large area, possibly miles apart, and permanent injury. The sooner life- § 1915.88(c)(1)). Studies show that for some may be remotely located. In these threatening conditions are treated, the each minute sudden cardiac care is not shipyards, it is unlikely that a first aid more likely that the outcome will be treated, the probability of reviving the provider located in one work area positive. The American Heart heart decreases by as much as 10 would be able to reach all work areas Association (AHA) found that when percent (Ex. 7). within the shipyard quickly enough to resuscitation and automatic external In another case, an employee began provide effective intervention. defibrillation are delivered within three experiencing chest pain after climbing Accordingly, OSHA believes that each to five minutes, reported survival rates down a scaffolding stair tower for his group of clustered work areas must have from sudden cardiac arrest are as high lunch break. When he asked coworkers an adequate number of first aid as 48 to 74 percent (Ex. 8). Studies have for help, they began walking him along providers to ensure that timely shown that for each minute sudden the pier, presumably to an on-site intervention is provided for employees cardiac arrest is not treated, the infirmary. The employee collapsed working at a work area within that probability of reviving the heart while he was walking and died of a group. By contrast, a single work area decreases by 7 to 10 percent (Exs. 7, 8). heart attack. Under the proposed distantly located from other work areas These data indicate that having provisions, there would have been may, of necessity, be considered a work responders at the work location could trained employees who would have location because first aid providers in significantly increase the survival rates known to have the employee lie down other work areas would not be able to for injured employees. rather walk to an infirmary. Moreover, reach the area quickly enough to Having first aid providers at the work these employees would have been able effectively aid an injured employee. location can also ‘‘buy time’’ until off- to start CPR, which would have Additionally, OSHA is proposing to site rescuers arrive. For example, maximized the employee’s survivability add a requirement that employers performing CPR immediately can help potential. Similarly, a shipyard ensure the work location has first aid to preserve heart and brain function employee who collapsed while he was providers during each workshift. Many until local emergency services are able working in the engine room of a large shipyards have multiple workshifts and to provide complete medical treatment, ship may have survived had other employers must ensure that employees such as providing oxygen or using an employees working in the engine room working in any of these workshifts will automated external defibrillator (AED) or on the vessel been trained to render have effective first aid intervention if an to restore normal heart rhythm. first aid. There is no indication in the injury occurs. Having first aid providers According to IMIS, there were 13 IMIS abstract whether there were any at each work location is especially fatalities in shipyards that were deemed trained first aid providers in the engine important during those hours when on- ‘‘heart attack’’ or ‘‘coronary’’ within a 15 room or on the vessel to perform CPR. site and off-site infirmaries and clinics year period. Out of those 13, only 4 The proposed requirement to ensure are not open. reports documented any basic life that during each workshift there are an Proposed paragraph (c)(1) also support, such as CPR or first aid, prior adequate number of first aid providers includes the following objective factors to rescue squads arriving on the scene. (proposed § 1915.88(c)(1)) also may employers must consider in determining Even for injuries that are not have prevented shipyard fatalities how many providers are needed at each immediately life threatening, timely first reported in the IMIS database. For work location: aid can reduce further injury and example, during a ‘‘graveyard’’ shift, a • The sizes and location of work significantly aid recovery by, for shipyard employee working in the locations in the shipyard; example, immobilizing fractures, bottom of a vessel cofferdam died after • The number of employees at each reducing blood loss or providing he suffered cardiac arrest. There is no work location; warmth for shock. indication in the abstract whether any • The nature of the hazards present at For example, the proposed provisions first aid providers attempted each work location; and requiring trained employees at each resuscitation or indeed whether there • The distance of each shipyard work work location to render first aid, were any first aid providers at the location from clinics (on-site or off-site), including cardiopulmonary shipyard during that workshift. rescue squads and hospitals. resuscitation (CPR), may have prevented For purposes of this provision, the OSHA believes that the addition of the following shipyard fatalities. In one meaning of a shipyard ‘‘work location’’ the objective factors not only will make case, a shipyard employee was will depend on the size, nature and the requirement easier for employers to electrocuted while troubleshooting a location of the shipyard. OSHA does not understand and comply with, but also

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72467

will address SESAC’s concern about the attack. Had the coworkers been trained OSHA requests comment on the vagueness of the current language in first aid and CPR, they would have proposed first aid training requirement. (Docket SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, pp. known the correct steps to follow when Should the final standard require that 167–173). (A more detailed explanation an employee experiences the early signs first aid providers have a valid first aid of the objective factors is included and symptoms of a cardiac event. and CPR certificate? Should the final below in the discussion of first aid Section 1915.98(a) currently requires rule specify the areas in which first aid supplies). that any person administering first aid providers must be trained? Should OSHA believes the proposed revision be ‘‘qualified,’’ but does not define the OSHA include an appendix similar to should not pose significant new burdens term. In paragraph (c)(2), OSHA that in § 1910.266 or 1918.97 in the final for shipyard employers since many proposes to make this intent clearer by rule? If not, why not? If so, what should already have multiple employees at stating that employees designated to the program include? Should the each work location who are qualified to provide first aid must have a ‘‘valid first program include hands-on exercises? provide first aid. For instance, one aid certificate.’’ The proposed language Should the final rule include a SESAC member said that a significant is drawn from a similar requirement in requirement that whatever first aid number of employees in Boston area the Longshoring standard, which OSHA training program and trainer/provider shipyards already receive first aid updated in 1997 (§ 1918.97(b)). the employer uses, that the program training: The proposal is designed to give and/or trainer be certified by a nationally recognized first aid [T]he employer would pick employees to employers maximum flexibility in go to the first aid training center, and after developing a first aid training program organization? Please explain. the training was over, he’d go back to the that is appropriate for the types of In your establishment and/or shop and other people would go, and it was working conditions and hazards in their industry, what training and certification a continual thing, and they’d be certified workplaces. With one exception, CPR do first aid providers have and does it (SESAC 1992–2, Ex. 102X, p. 161). training, the proposal does not establish include CPR training? What organizations, if any, conduct the first OSHA requests comment on the the specific content of the required first aid training and certification? How proposed provision. In your aid training program that employers frequently do first aid providers have establishment and industry, how many must follow. As long as the certificate is refresher training? employees are trained to provide first issued by a responsible organization, Paragraph (d)—First Aid Supplies—In aid? Are there trained providers at each such as the American Red Cross, the paragraph (d), OSHA proposes to revise work location and during all workshifts? American Heart Association, or other the existing requirement on first aid Are the objective factors in the proposed equivalent organization, which requires supplies (§ 1915.98(b)). The proposed standard appropriate for determining successful course completion as changes give employers more flexibility how many first aid providers employers evidence of qualification, the and assistance in tailoring the type, should have at each work location? requirements of the proposal would be amount and location of supplies to the What additional factors, if any, should met. Likewise, the proposal does not specific needs of their workplace. The employers consider? specify a frequency for first aid refresher proposal includes objective criteria, OSHA has recently developed and training. Whatever frequency the which are the same as those proposed published a Best Practices Guide: certifying organization requires for for first aid providers, to assist Fundamentals of a Workplace First-Aid retaining certification, usually three employers in meeting the requirement. Program (Ex. 18). This document years, would be allowed. A non-mandatory appendix to this provides a discussion on the basics of OSHA is considering including an section references the most recent assessing the risks and designing a first appendix on the requirements of a first consensus standards regarding first aid aid program that is specific to the aid training program to ensure that supplies, consistent with the recently worksite. Although this document employees are fully trained by qualified revised general industry standard addresses some basics, while instructors. This appendix could be (§ 1910.151). developing a first aid program, similar to that found in the Logging Location of first aid supplies. In employers need to keep in mind the Operations standard (§ 1910.266), which paragraph (d)(1), OSHA proposes to additional factors specified in the includes a mandatory appendix that revise the existing standard to require proposal. specifies the minimally acceptable first that first aid supplies be provided ‘‘at First aid provider training/ aid training program that employers each work location.’’ (In proposed qualifications. The importance of first must follow. Some of the required paragraph (d)(2), OSHA identifies aid training is immeasurable. Although topics include respiratory arrest, cardiac objective criteria to assist employers in some shipyard employees may have arrest, lacerations/abrasions, shock, determining where to locate supplies in received training in the past, burns and loss of consciousness. each work location so they will be appropriate and up-to-date training is Similarly, the Longshoring first aid readily accessible when needed). The necessary to ensure that injured standard (§ 1918.97) includes a non- existing standard requires that, under employees receive correct intervention. mandatory appendix that lists the basic certain circumstances, first aid kits be Lack of training can also result in a lack elements of a first aid training program. furnished ‘‘for each vessel on which of treatment when it is needed. For Along with topic areas such as shock, work is being performed’’ and be kept example, in 2002, as an employee was bleeding, poisoning and burns, this ‘‘close to the vessel’’ (§ 1915.98(a)). The standing on a scaffold to bolt a motor appendix also specifies the manner in general industry standard, which was onto a crane located off of the main which employees must receive training. revised in 1998, specifies that first aid house. After descending from the For example, it recommends that supplies must be ‘‘readily available’’ scaffolding for his lunch break, the trainees develop hands-on skills (§ 1910.151(b); 63 FR 33450 (6/19/ employee complained of chest pains through the use of manikins, a course 1998)). and asked coworkers for help. They workbook, and adequate time for The proposed revision gives proceeded to walk the employee along emphasis on situations likely to be employers more flexibility and guidance the pier. The employee collapsed while encountered in the particular about where supplies need to be he was walking and died of a heart workplace. located. In addition, the proposal

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72468 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

clarifies OSHA’s intent that first aid basic first aid kits specified in the location to ensure that first aid kits supplies need to be located at all work current ANSI standard and includes contain the types and quantity of locations throughout the shipyard, those items that ANSI no longer recommends supplies needed to effectively treat the onboard and near vessels as well as for general workplace kits (i.e., injuries and illnesses that could be those at landside work locations. tourniquets and forceps) (Ex. 3–2, Table expected. For example, in shops where OSHA requests comment on this 5–1). hot work is performed first aid supplies provision. In your industry and OSHA believes that adopting a for burns would be necessary, and in establishment, where are first aid kits performance-based approach on the outdoor areas first aid items for insect located and what factors do you contents of first aid kits will give or animal bites may be needed. consider in determining where to locate employers maximum flexibility in • The distance of each work location them? tailoring their first aid supplies to the from hospitals, clinics, and rescue Number of first aid supplies. The conditions and hazards present in their squads. The distance—and therefore the existing standard (§ 1915.98(b)) requires workplace. Adding objective criteria time needed—to get to hospitals or that employers provide ‘‘sufficient’’ that employers must consider in clinics (on-site or off-site), and for quantities of first aid supplies, but does determining the content of first aid kits rescue squads to respond is also an not define the term. In paragraph (d)(1), provides a framework for assuring that important factor in determining the OSHA proposes to revise the existing first aid supplies will be appropriate location, amount and type of first aid rule to require that employers provide and adequate for the shipyard work supplies employers need to provide. A ‘‘adequate’’ first aid supplies at each location. single first aid kit may be adequate for work location, and adds, in proposed Objective criteria. In paragraph (d)(2), small work locations that are close to paragraph (d)(2), objective criteria OSHA proposes to add objective criteria on-site infirmaries or local emergency employers must follow in determining to assist employers in determining services. However, additional kits and whether they have provided enough whether the location, content and types of supplies may be necessary supplies to meet the needs of that work amount of first aid supplies are when medical services are farther away. location. Of particular importance in adequate and appropriate for shipyard OSHA requests comment on the determining the number of supplies is work locations. The proposal includes proposed provisions, including the the number of employees who will be the following four criteria that objective factors employers would need working at the specific location. OSHA employers must consider: to consider in determining the location, requests comment on this provision. In • The size and location of each amount and types of first aid supplies your industry and establishment, how shipyard work location. The size of the to provide. What additional factors, if many first aid kits are provided and shipyard work location is an important any, should employers consider? In what factors do you consider in consideration. It is likely that large work your establishment and industry, what determining how many are needed? locations are spread out and, as such, factors do you use in making Proposed paragraph (d)(1) also more first aid kits may be necessary to determinations about first aid supplies? requires that employers maintain their ensure they are readily accessible if an Non-mandatory appendix. Section first aid supplies so they remain employee gets injured. Employers also 1910.151 includes a recently revised adequate. This means that employers need to consider the location of where non-mandatory appendix to provide must ensure that not only are the employees are working throughout information on the contents of first aid number of first aid supplies adequate, shipyards when determining the kits (70 FR 1112, 1141 (1/5/2005)). but also that exhausted supplies are number, content and positioning of first OSHA proposes to incorporate the replaced. For purposes of this provision, aid kits. For example, remote work § 1910.151 appendix, with revisions that maintain also means that first aid locations or other shipyard work update the appendix. The proposed supplies must be kept in serviceable locations that are farther away from appendix provides guidance to condition. A more detailed explanation rescue squads or hospitals may need to employers on the contents of first aid of the proposed maintenance have more first aid supplies or a broader kits, assessing workplace risks, and requirement is included below along range of supplies to care for an injured OSHA’s requirements for protecting first with the discussion of the inspection of employee until additional help arrives aid providers from possible exposure to first aid supplies. or the employee can be transported for bloodborne pathogens. In the proposal, Contents of first aid kits. In paragraph more advanced care. Work locations OSHA is updating the reference to the (d)(2), OSHA proposes to revise the that may be cut off by passing railcars ANSI Z308.1 standard on minimum existing requirements on the contents of also may need more first aid supplies in requirements for workplace first aid first aid kits (§ 1915.98(b)). The existing case access roads are blocked when an kits. The proposed appendix references provision specifies a list of items that injury occurs. In addition, it would be the 2003 ANSI standard (Ex. 3–16). The first aid kits must contain, a list that necessary for vessels that are underway appendix to § 1915.87, which OSHA SESAC said was outdated (Docket 1992– to have adequate first aid supplies added in 1998 (70 FR 1141 (6/18/1998)), 1, Ex. 100X, pp. 161, 162). Based on onboard. references the 1998 ANSI standard (Ex. SESAC’s recommendation, in paragraph • The number of employees at each 3–2). OSHA requests comment on (d)(2), OSHA proposes to replace the list work location. In general, when there whether the non-mandatory appendix with a performance based approach. are more employees at a work location should include other information on The list of supplies in § 1915.98(b) the employer would need to provide first aid supplies. If so, what should it was adopted more than 30 years ago, more first aid supplies to prepare for the include? prior to adoption of the 1978 ANSI possibility that an accident could result Maintenance and inspection of first Z308.1 standard on workplace first aid in multiple employee injuries, or that aid supplies. In paragraphs (d)(1) and kits and is inconsistent with the current several accidents could occur within a (3), OSHA proposes to revise the ANSI standard (Ex. 3–2, ANSI Z308.1 short period of time. existing requirements on the (1998) Minimum Requirements for • The nature of hazards present at maintenance and inspection of first aid Workplace First Aid Kits). The list in each work location. Employers need to supplies (§ 1915.98(b) and (c)). OSHA § 1915.98(b) does not include all of the assess the specific needs and the nature proposes to replace the existing minimum content requirements for of the hazards present in each work maintenance and inspection provisions

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72469

with more flexible performance require employers to inspect first aid located within each work area for language. supplies at intervals that ensure they immediate emergency use. For purposes With regard to maintenance of first remain in ‘‘dry, sterile and serviceable of this paragraph, OSHA does not aid supplies, the existing standard condition.’’ The proposal gives intend ‘‘work area’’ to mean the entire requires that first aid kits have a employers greater flexibility to work location or workplace. Rather, weatherproof container and that determine what inspection procedures work area means the immediate area supplies are in individually sealed would be most effective for ensuring where employees are working and packages. Read together, proposed that supplies remain in appropriate potentially exposed to hazardous or paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(3) require that condition and adequately replenished. toxic materials. Having quick drench first aid supplies be maintained in ‘‘dry, For example, it would allow employers facilities as close as possible to the sterile and serviceable condition.’’ For to opt for stocking work locations with hazard is necessary to ensure that purposes of this provision, OSHA a larger supply of first aid supplies and hazardous substances can be removed would define serviceable condition to establish something other than a weekly quick enough to prevent injury or mean the state or ability of a device to maintenance and inspection schedule. It absorption and that facilities are directly operate as it was intended by the also would allow employers to use accessible in those situations where the manufacturer to operate (proposed smaller, portable first aid kits, such as employee may be blinded by a § 1915.95). for mobile work crews, which may need hazardous substance. For example, OSHA believes the proposed language to be inspected and restocked more where employees working in a paint provides employers with greater frequently. shop are routinely exposed to solvents flexibility in tailoring the maintenance OSHA requests comment on the and other chemicals during mixing or and packaging of first aid supplies to the proposed maintenance and inspection cleaning operations, a quick drench specific conditions present in their work requirements. In your establishment and facility needs to be located within the locations while at the same time industry, what maintenance and shop so employees do not have to go to ensuring that supplies remain useable. inspection procedures are followed to another area in the shipyard to reach a For example, first aid kits for use in ensure that first aid supplies are in quick drench facility. outdoor and mobile work locations may adequate supply and serviceable In those work areas where it is need weatherproof containers to keep condition? impracticable to place permanent (i.e., supplies dry, sterile and serviceable, but Paragraph (e)—Quick Drenching/ plumbed) quick drench facilities, such the same may not be necessary for first Flushing Facilities—Section 1910.151(c) as confined spaces, the employer would aid kits used in enclosed facilities. currently requires that quick drenching need to provide portable facilities. OSHA notes that individually packaged or flushing facilities (‘‘quick drench OSHA does not believe this should pose first aid supplies stored in weatherproof facilities’’) be provided within the work a problem for employers since many containers would typically be area for immediate emergency use already have these portable facilities. considered in compliance with the where the eyes or body may be exposed The ANSI Z358.1 standard includes proposed requirements as would to ‘‘injurious corrosive materials.’’ specifications for self-contained supplies maintained in accordance with OSHA proposes in paragraph (e) to eyewash equipment as well as personal the current ANSI Z308.1 standard (Ex. retain and expand the existing provision quick drench equipment that could be 3–2). to require that quick drench facilities be used in such locations (Ex. 3–3, ANSI As mentioned, OSHA proposes to provided where employees could be Z358.1). require that first aid supplies be kept in splashed with hazardous or toxic OSHA requests comment on whether ‘‘serviceable condition.’’ The purpose of substances. Shipyard employees the final rule should adopt the approach the provision is to ensure that the first involved in operations such as cleaning, in the ANSI standard that quick drench aid supplies remain effective. To ensure painting, and stripping operations are at facilities be located within a maximum first aid supplies remain serviceable, risk of being splashed with solvents or distance (e.g., distance traveled in 10 employers would need to store them in other chemicals. Although these seconds) of the hazard. In your accordance with manufacturer substances may not necessarily be establishment and industry, where are instructions (e.g., out of direct sunlight, corrosives, they can injure or burn the quick drench facilities located? How not above a certain temperature) and skin or eyes or be absorbed rapidly close to the immediate work areas are replace supplies when their use date through the skin causing harmful they located and generally how long expires. Supplies that are maintained effects. does it take an injured employee to and operated in accordance with The expanded coverage of the reach them? What type of quick drench manufacturer instructions and proposed provision is consistent with facilities are provided for use in areas recommendations would generally be the scope of the current ANSI Z358.1 where a permanent (plumbed) facility considered in compliance with the standard (Ex. 3–4, ANSI Z358.1 (1998)), cannot be placed? serviceable condition requirement. American National Standard for Paragraph (f)—Basket Stretchers—In Inherent in the proposed requirement to Emergency Eyewash and Shower paragraph (f), OSHA is altering the ensure that first aid supplies are in Equipment). The ANSI standard requirements for basket stretchers. proper condition is the employer’s establishes minimum requirements for Paragraph (f) proposes that an adequate obligation to replace supplies that are emergency eyewashes and showers for number of basket stretchers, or the found to be deficient. persons who have been exposed to equivalent, be readily accessible. OSHA In regard to inspection of first aid ‘‘injurious’’ or ‘‘hazardous materials,’’ also proposes that they be equipped supplies, the existing standard requires which the standard defines as ‘‘any with permanent lifting bridles that that first aid supplies be checked before substance or compound that has the enable the stretcher to be attached to being sent out on a job and at least capability of producing adverse effects hoisting gear and be capable of lifting at weekly thereafter to ensure that on the health and safety of humans.’’ least 5,000 pounds. In addition, these expended items are replaced Location of quick drench facilities. In basket stretchers must be capable of (§ 1915.98(c)). In paragraph (d)(3), paragraph (e), OSHA proposes to retain securely restraining the injured OSHA proposes to replace that language the existing requirement (§ 1910.151(c)) employee and provide a blanket or other with performance language that would that a quick drenching facility be suitable covering. Finally, the basket

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72470 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

stretchers must be stored in a clearly- requirement recognizes that, in some carry such stretchers. OSHA believes marked location, be protected from situations, having just one basket this language is no longer necessary damage and be inspected to ensure they stretcher at a location where work is since the proposed language in remain in a safe and serviceable being performed on vessels or vessel paragraph (f)(1) ensures that basket condition. sections may be adequate to ensure stretchers are ‘‘readily accessible.’’ The Number of basket stretchers. In ready accessibility. For example, as proposal gives employers flexibility to paragraph (f)(1), OSHA proposes to SESAC members stated, if a crane is provide their own stretchers or utilize revise the existing requirements capable of hoisting a basket stretcher the stretchers provided by local (§ 1915.98(d)) on the required number of from any one of several barges docked emergency squads if they are readily basket stretchers used to remove injured together, one stretcher may provide accessible. OSHA requests comment on employees from vessels. Section ready accessibility for that group of whether local emergency squads are 1915.98(d) currently requires that vessels. Likewise, where a shipyard readily accessible to vessel work employers provide at least one basket crane mounted on railtracks can move locations and whether they have basket stretcher (or equivalent) ‘‘for each vessel back and forth to hoist a basket stretcher stretchers that meet the proposed on which ten (10) or more employees from one of several vessels or vessel requirements. To what extent do are working,’’ but does not require the sections, one stretcher may be adequate shipyard employers rely on local employer to provide more than two to remove injured employees from any emergency squads to provide basket stretchers ‘‘on each job location.’’ of those vessels or vessel sections stretchers? Employers are exempted from this (Docket SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, p. Specifications for basket stretchers. In requirement where ambulance services 155). paragraph (f)(2), OSHA proposes to carry such stretchers. Where basket In other situations, however, one retain, with revisions, the existing stretchers are required, they must be basket stretcher may not be adequate to specification requirements for basket equipped with lifting bridles and a ensure that one is readily accessible. In stretchers (§ 1915.98(d)). Proposed blanket, and kept close to the vessel. very large shipyards that have several paragraph (f)(2)(i) retains the existing SESAC members raised a number of work locations with hundreds, if not requirement that basket stretchers have concerns about the existing section. thousands, of employees working far permanent lifting bridles to enable the Members said the provision was unclear apart on vessels and vessel sections, stretcher to be attached to hoisting gear. about whether a basket stretcher must more than one basket stretcher may be OSHA proposes to add a strength be dedicated solely to a vessel or needed to ensure that one is readily requirement that basket stretcher bridles whether it could be used for all vessels accessible to each work location. Some be capable of lifting at least 5,000 located within a specific area (e.g., on SESAC members also said additional pounds (2,270 kg), which provides a the same pier) (Docket SESAC 1993–1, stretchers should be provided where it safety factor of five. The proposed Ex. 100X, pp. 147–167). SESAC also is necessary to speed up removal of addition is based on requirements in the said it was unclear what the term ‘‘job injured employees (Docket SESAC Marine Terminals and Longshoring location’’ refers to (e.g., a pier, a vessel, 1993–1, Ex. 100X, p. 159). Having standards, which were updated in 1997 or a work area onboard a vessel). additional stretchers allows first aid (§§ 1917.26(d) and 1918.97(d)). Several SESAC members said it was providers to ready other injured In paragraph (f)(2)(ii) OSHA proposes burdensome and unnecessary to require employees for removal while the first to add a requirement that basket that basket stretchers be dedicated employee is being lifted to shore. stretchers have restraints that are solely to one vessel and that there was OSHA believes the proposed revision capable of securely holding the injured no reason to provide more stretchers is a reasonable approach that will employee while the stretcher is lifted or than were capable of being hoisted. provide effective protection for moved. This addition is also based on SESAC members pointed out that since employees. In certain circumstances, the Marine Terminals and Longshoring many shipyard locations have only one basket stretchers will need to be standards (§§ 1917.26(d)(4) and crane, and only one basket stretcher can provided even when fewer than 10 1918.97(d)(4)). OSHA believes it is be moved at one time, only one basket employees are working onboard a appropriate to apply the Marine stretcher should be required. (Docket vessel, an issue that concerned SESAC Terminals and Longshoring provisions SESAC 1992–2, Ex. 104X, pp. 146—147; (Docket SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, p. to shipyard employment because the Docket SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, pp. 147). At the same time, it gives use of basket stretchers and the working 155–158). employers flexibility to tailor their conditions are similar. The proposed Other SESAC members said the efforts to the specific conditions and changes should not pose a problem for provision was not protective enough. equipment present at the work area. shipyard employers because most basket Specifically, they were concerned that OSHA requests comment on the stretchers already meet those criteria. the provision did not appear to require proposed provision. In your Finally, in paragraph (f)(2)(iii) OSHA basket stretchers if fewer than 10 establishment how many basket proposes to retain the existing employees worked onboard a vessel, a stretchers are provided and where are requirement that each basket stretcher cutoff that appeared arbitrary to them. they located? Are basket stretchers have a blanket or other suitable covering They also said that OSHA should make provided for vessel sections and when to cover injured employees and protect explicit that the provision applies to fewer than 10 employees are working them from environmental conditions. vessel sections in addition to vessels onboard a vessel or vessel section? If OSHA requests comment on the (Docket SESAC 1993–1, Ex. 100X, pp. not, what measures are used to ensure proposed specifications for basket 142–143, 147). that injured employees are removed stretchers. The Marine Terminals and Location of basket stretchers. In safely and quickly in these situations? Longshoring standards also have paragraph (f)(1), OSHA proposes a Exception. In paragraph (f)(1), OSHA specifications for stretchers and bridles performance-based provision requiring proposes to delete language in the to make vertical patient lifts that employers provide basket stretchers existing rule (§ 1915.98(d)) stating that (§§ 1917.26(d)(5) and 1918.97(d)(5)). so they are readily accessible when the requirement to provide basket OSHA requests comment on whether work is being performed onboard a stretchers does not apply where the final standard should include those vessel or vessel section. The proposed ambulance services are available and additional specifications.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72471

Storage of basket stretchers. In used immediately (i.e., within three to sanitation, § 1915.88. The new proposed paragraph (f)(3), OSHA proposes to add five minutes). For example, in the first section carries forward many provisions a requirement that basket stretchers be 10 months after Chicago’s O’Hare and that have applied to shipyards for stored in a clearly-marked location and Midway Airports installed AEDs, 9 of 14 several decades. At the same time, it in a manner that prevents damage and (64 percent) cardiac victims were reflects improvements in workplace provides protection from environmental revived and survived (Ex. 7). sanitation that have been developed conditions. The proposed language is In the past decade, there have been since the earlier standards were based on similar requirements in the significant advances in AED technology, adopted. Marine Terminals and Longshoring including advances in miniaturization Adverse health effects associated with standards (1917.26(d)(7) and and improvements in their reliability the lack of appropriate sanitation 1918.97(d)(7)). and safety. Today, AEDs are small, facilities are well recognized and The addition of this provision would lightweight units in portable carriers; documented. They include accomplish two goals. First, requiring run on rechargeable batteries; analyze communicable diseases, heat-related storage areas to be clearly marked helps the heart rhythm; and automatically illness, health effects related to delay of to ensure that stretchers are easy to indicate when to shock with easy-to- urination and defecation, and effects locate when they are needed. Second, follow audio prompts. These associated with ingestion or absorption storing stretchers so they are protected improvements have also greatly of hazardous or toxic substances. These from damage and environmental minimized the training needed to health hazards were discussed at length conditions prevents deterioration of the operate them. Many studies have shown in the preamble to the final Field equipment. OSHA requests comment on that AEDs are nearly error-free and Sanitation standard (52 FR 16050, 5/1/ the proposed provision. In your effective when used by non-medical 87). OSHA has updated this discussion establishment and industry, how are first aid responders in the workplace and placed it in the docket as a basket stretchers stored to protect them (Ex. 7). The costs of AEDs have dropped reference document (Ex. 12). from damage and environmental dramatically in recent years. In 2001, for OSHA recognizes that working conditions? How are storage areas instance, AEDs cost $3,000–$4,500 on conditions in shipyards are often less marked to ensure easy access? average. Now they are widely available than ideal for sanitation. For example, Inspection. Proposed paragraph (f)(4) for less than $1,500 (Ex. 5). OSHA some shipyards are in remote locations, would require the employer to inspect anticipates that AED costs will continue without adequate piped water and stretchers at intervals that ensure they to decline as the use of AEDs increases. sewer facilities. Much shipyard work is remain in safe and serviceable OSHA’s existing medical services and also performed outdoors, often in high condition. This is a flexible, first aid standards do not require that temperatures and humidity. OSHA has performance-based measure similar to AEDs be provided in workplaces or that previously developed sanitation the requirement to inspect first aid employees be trained in their operation. standards to address these types of supplies to ensure they are adequate. However, many employers, concerned working conditions in marine terminals This proposed measure will assure that that local emergency services cannot (§ 1917.127), field sanitation lifesaving equipment functions properly respond quickly enough, have been (§ 1928.110), longshoring (§ 1918.95), when needed in an emergency and is equipping their workplaces with AEDs and construction (§ 1926.51). The particularly important if basket and training employees in their use. Agency has used these standards as stretchers are not used frequently. OSHA requests comment on whether source documents for the present shipyards should be required to have proposal. In addition to these sources, Automated External Defibrillators AEDs as part of their first aid and OSHA has also reviewed the most (AEDs) medical services. If not, why not? If so, recent applicable ANSI sanitation OSHA is raising for discussion the should the requirement apply to all standards—in particular, ANSI Z4.1– issue of whether shipyards should be shipyards or be limited to certain types 1995 (Ex. 3–6) and Z4.3–1995 (Ex. 3– required to have Automated External of work or work locations (e.g., remote 7)—and incorporated relevant Defibrillators (AEDs). According to the work areas, work where employees are provisions into the proposed standard. American Heart Association, over exposed to electrical hazards, (ANSI Z4.1 addresses general sanitation 300,000 individuals die from cardiac shiftwork)? What criteria should in workplaces, while ANSI Z4.3 covers arrest each year, with most occurring employers use to determine whether non-sewered waste disposal systems.) outside hospitals (Ex. 8). In 2001 and and how many AEDs should be Most of the changes being proposed in 2002, there were 6,628 work-related provided and where they should be § 1915.88 reflect changes in technology fatalities reported to OSHA—1,216 of located? In your establishment and and sanitation practices that have these deaths were from heart attack, 354 industry are AEDs provided? If not, why developed since the original standards from electric shock, and 267 from not? If so, how many are provided and were adopted. For example, the asphyxia (Ex. 6). Survival rates for out- what criteria were considered in making proposal specifically addresses portable of-hospital cardiac arrest are only one to that determination? Who is trained and toilets and other portable sanitation five percent, but treatment of ventricular authorized to operate the AEDs? facilities. The proposed standard is also fibrillation (i.e., chaotic beating of the more performance-oriented and flexible heart) with immediate defibrillation Section 1915.88 Sanitation than the existing requirements. (i.e., within one minute) has achieved Sanitation in shipyards is currently As Table 3 makes clear, many of the survival rates as high as 90 percent (Ex. covered by a shipyard standard, changes being incorporated into 7). Fast and immediate defibrillation is § 1915.97, and is supplemented by a proposed § 1915.88 are editorial in the most critical step in treatment of general industry standard, § 1910.141. nature. This reflects the Agency’s effort cardiac arrest because it is the definitive (See Ex. 16–9, OSHA’s Tool Bag to merge most of the current therapy for ventricular fibrillation. Directive.) As part of its overall efforts requirements of § 1910.141 and AEDs restore normal heart rhythm to incorporate comprehensive shipyard § 1915.97 into a single set of sanitation with electrical shock (defibrillation). requirements into Part 1915, the Agency requirements for shipyards. Table 3 AEDs have been shown to significantly is proposing to consolidate and update provides an overview of the new increase survival rates where they are these provisions in a new standard on proposed § 1915.88, a comparison to the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72472 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

existing requirements, and a brief substantive changes being proposed, the various SESAC recommendations, as explanation of all proposed changes. Agency’s rationale for these changes, appropriate. The preamble discussion following and related issues. In addition, the BILLING CODE 4510–26–P Table 3 focuses on the relatively few discussion includes responses to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72473

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.000 72474 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.001 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72475

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.002 72476 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.003 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72477

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.004 72478 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.005 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72479

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.006 72480 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 EP20DE07.007 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72481

Most of the changes in this proposal fatal, especially in hot and humid requires that toilet facilities be located are adequately discussed in Table 3. working conditions. Ready access to within a one-quarter-mile walk of each However, some provisions require sanitation facilities will also increase employee’s place of work additional discussion and explanation. the likelihood of their use, reducing the (§ 1928.110(c)(2)(iii)). ANSI Z4.1 The following section provides risks associated with delayed use. requires that potable water and sewered additional discussion concerning these In order for sanitation facilities to be toilet facilities be located within 200 elements of the proposal and raises considered ‘‘readily accessible,’’ feet of any place where employees are specific issues for public comment. employees must be able to reach the regularly engaged in work (Ex. 3–6, Paragraph (a)—General facilities quickly whenever they need to §§ 5.1.1 and 6.1.2). Requirements—Paragraph (a) use them, and there must be no On July 29, 1998, a shipyard incorporates a series of general obstacles to gaining quick access. OSHA employee was finishing up a workshift requirements for the accessibility, recognizes that whether sanitation where he was operating grinding and adequacy, and maintenance of facilities are readily accessible depends sanding equipment on two decks of a sanitation facilities in shipyards. It on the type of sanitation facility, the ship. He clocked out at 2:30 p.m., got a simplifies the existing standards and sizes and locations of worksites, and ride to his supervisor’s office to get makes them apply more uniformly physical characteristics of the shipyard. some information, and was driven back throughout the shipyard. The proposal In small shipyards, sanitation facilities to the wet dock. He was walking to the also uses a new term, ‘‘sanitation may be readily accessible if they are bike area when he became dizzy and fell facilities’’ (defined in § 1915.95), to located in one area. However, where to his knees. His supervisor picked him cover the wide range of elements that worksites are large and spread out, up and gave him water and a cold employers provide for the ‘‘health and toilets, handwashing facilities and compress. He was transported to the personal needs of employees.’’ drinking water located in only one first aid station, where he was given Sanitation facilities include drinking location would likely not be considered oxygen and ice packs were placed on water, toilets, handcleaning facilities, readily accessible. his head and under his arms. When he showers, changing rooms, and eating Sanitation facilities also must be later collapsed, emergency medical and drinking areas. The term also readily accessible to shipyard technicians ventilated and defibrillated includes the supplies for those facilities, employees who work onboard vessels. him. He died later at a hospital from such as drinking cups, toilet paper, Where employees work on a small heat exhaustion and heat stroke, towels, soap, and waterless cleaning vessel, sanitation facilities may be possibly from not having enough agents. readily accessible if they are located drinking water readily accessible at his A sanitation facility cannot meet the dockside. However, where employees work location. The existing drinking employee’s health needs unless it meets work on a large vessel, they may not be water requirements specify that all the requirements addressing able to get to facilities quickly enough employers provide potable water ‘‘in all accessibility, adequacy and if such facilities are located only on the places of employment’’ maintenance. For instance, if toilets are dock. Sanitation facilities may need to (§ 1910.141(b)(1)), but do not identify provided but are all located too far be located on deck or in various places where water supplies must be located in away, employees may have to refrain throughout the vessel to ensure those workplaces. The proposed rule from using facilities, or from drinking employees have ready access when they clarifies the existing requirements by during the workshift so they will not need to use them. When the ship’s toilet specifying that employers must provide need to use them. Employees may do and handwashing facilities are not adequate and ‘‘readily accessible’’ the same thing if toilets, particularly available to shipyard employees drinking water in amounts that meet the portable ones, are dirty, not serviced working onboard vessels (e.g., the ship health and personal needs of each regularly, or require a long wait. These is being built or systems are turned off employee at the worksite (proposed actions can result in significant adverse during repair) the employer needs to § 1915.87(a)(1) and (b)(2)). In the health effects (Ex. 12). make other arrangements to ensure that summary and explanation of § 1915.87, Proposed paragraph (a)(1) requires such facilities are readily accessible. OSHA also identifies factors that that sanitation facilities be (1) readily Whether sanitation facilities are employers need to consider in accessible, and (2) adequate for the readily accessible is also related to how determining how much drinking water number of employees at the work frequently they must be used during a they must supply and where it must be premises. Employers must provide workshift. For example, drinking water located. These factors include size and sanitation facilities that meet both supplies, especially during hot and location of worksites, frequency of use, requirements in order to be considered humid summer weather, must be at or and environmental conditions such as in compliance. close to the employee’s immediate work hot weather. Had the proposed Readily accessible. Unlike the area. Employees who perform heavy clarifications been in place, it would sanitation standards for marine manual labor, work with heat-producing have been clearer that the shipyard terminals, longshoring, and field equipment, or must spend time in employer needed to ensure that the sanitation (§§ 1917.127, 1918.127, spaces that are not well ventilated or employee had adequate drinking water 1928.110, respectively), the current air-conditioned need to have enough accessible at their work location on the sanitation standards for shipyards do drinking water close at hand to prevent vessel. not directly address the accessibility of dehydration. On the other hand, OSHA requests comment on the sanitation facilities. Paragraph (a)(1) of changing rooms and eating areas that are proposed requirement for location of proposed § 1915.88 remedies this used only once or twice during a sanitation facilities. In particular, OSHA omission, using performance-oriented workshift may not need to be as close requests comment on whether the final language. Ready access to sanitation to the work area. rule should contain more specific facilities helps to protect employee OSHA notes that other sanitation requirements for the location of health and reduce the risk of adverse standards specify maximum distances sanitation facilities, especially toilet health effects. For example, lack of for locating sanitation facilities relative facilities. For example, should the final ready access to drinking water can to employee work areas. For example, rule specify maximum distances, result in dehydration, which can be the OSHA Field Sanitation standard maximum walking times (e.g., 5 or 10

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72482 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

minutes), or other objective criteria for requirement from OSHA’s Field time. By contrast to the OSHA standard, determining where sanitation facilities Sanitation standard the current ANSI standard has a must be located in the workplace? (§ 1928.110(c)(1)(ii)). The preamble to different table of ratios (Table 4, ANSI Should different specifications be that standard explained that when Z4.1–1995), with a basic ratio of 1 toilet developed for specific types of employees work in hot and humid per 9 employees. In the three decades sanitation facilities? OSHA seeks temperatures, the temperature of since OSHA adopted its standard, information on where sanitation drinking water needs to be low enough nearly 90 percent of the States, at either facilities are located and what criteria to encourage them to drink and to cool the State or local level, have adopted the are used to make this determination. their core body temperature (52 FR 2003 International Plumbing Code (IPC Serviceable Condition. Paragraph 16087). Some shipyard employees also 2003), which incorporates the (a)(2) proposes to add language making work in very hot and humid requirements of the ANSI Z4.1–1995 more explicit OSHA’s longstanding environments. Cool water could help standard (one toilet per 9 employees). policy that employers supply and promote adequate hydration and reduce maintain sanitation facilities in clean, the risk of heat-related illnesses. OSHA TABLE 4.—ANSI Z4.1–1995 sanitary and serviceable condition. The requests comment on this issue. OSHA current general industry standard seeks information on the measures that Number of employees Minimum number of specifies that employers must keep all have been implemented to ensure that stools places of employment clean drinking water is cool, especially for (§ 1910.141(a)(3)(i)). The proposal employees working on board vessels or 1 to 9 ...... 1. clarifies that this requirement applies to 10 to 24 ...... 2. in hot and humid weather. 25 to 49 ...... 3. sanitation facilities at workplaces. The Paragraph (d) Toilet Facilities— 50 to 74 ...... 4. proposal also retains existing language Proposed paragraph (d) adopts the 75 to 100 ...... 5. on maintaining sanitary conditions from existing requirements on sewered toilets Over 100 ...... 1 for each additional the current lavatory requirements and as noted in Table 3, the proposal 30 persons. (§ 1910.141(d)(1)). would add a new paragraph (d)(3) to Paragraph (a)(2), adds a proposed cover portable toilet facilities, which are OSHA requests comment on the requirement for employers to maintain not addressed by § 1910.141(c). proposal to retain the 1:15 toilet ratio sanitation facilities in ‘‘serviceable Because of the proposed additions for from the existing standard. Should condition,’’ which OSHA proposes to portable toilets, OSHA proposes to OSHA adopt the 1:9 ratio in the current define (in § 1915.95) as the state or replace the existing term ‘‘toilet facility’’ ANSI Z4.1 and IPC 2003 standards? ability of a device to operate as it was with the terms ‘‘sewered toilet facility’’ Would such adoption significantly intended by the manufacturer to and ‘‘portable toilet facility.’’ These improve OSHA’s protection of employee operate. OSHA is including this new terms are used in the current ANSI Z4.1 health, and in what manner? What proposed provision primarily because and Z4.3 standards, respectively (Ex. 3– costs, if any, would result? If OSHA the proposed rule allows the use of 6, § 2.4; Ex. 3–7, §§ 2 and 5). OSHA were to adopt the ANSI/IPC table, portable toilet facilities. Portable toilet proposes to define these terms in should its application be limited in any facilities that are not properly serviced § 1915.95. ‘‘Sewered toilet facility’’ way, such as to facilities built after a can become unsanitary and overflow, would be defined to mean a fixture that certain date (e.g., the date the ANSI or thereby exposing employees to is connected to a sanitary sewer, septic IPC standards were adopted)? contaminants or causing them to avoid tank, holding tank (e.g., bilge), or on-site using the facilities. While OSHA is not sewage disposal treatment facility and Questions have been raised about specifying detailed servicing that is flushed with water. In contrast, whether toilet facilities are distributed requirements in the proposed rule, the ‘‘portable toilet facility’’ would be adequately throughout shipyards. As Agency notes that ANSI Z4.3 contains defined to mean a non-sewered toilet noted earlier, the field sanitation and useful information on servicing that may be either non-flushable, or ANSI standards establish more specific practices for portable toilets (Ex. 3–7). flushable with water or a non-water requirements for location of toilet OSHA requests comment on this flushing solution. Most portable toilet facilities relative to the location of the provision. OSHA seeks information on facilities used in shipyards are non- employee, 1/4 mile and 200 feet, the measures in place to ensure that flush chemical toilet facilities. respectively (§ 1928.110(c)(2)(iii); ANSI sanitation facilities and supplies are Paragraph (d)(2) Sewered toilet Z4.1, § 5.1.1 (Ex. 3–6)). OSHA requests maintained in clean, sanitary and facilities—Minimum number of sewered comment on whether the final rule serviceable condition. How often are toilet facilities. Proposed paragraph should contain specific requirements for sanitation facilities inspected, cleaned, (d)(2) would retain the existing the location of toilet facilities in and restocked? Are there different requirements of § 1910.141 for the shipyards. If not, why not? If so, what procedures and/or schedules for minimum number of sewered toilet specifications should OSHA use? portable toilet facilities as opposed to facilities employers must provide for Should the same or different other sanitation facilities? men and women. While the required specifications apply for both sewered Paragraph (b) Potable water— numbers of facilities vary depending on and portable toilets? Please explain. Proposed § 1915.88(b)(3) would expand the total number of employees at the Portable toilet facilities. As discussed the existing rule to allow employers to work site, the basic requirement is in Table 3, proposed § 1915.88(d)(3) provide drinking water in single use commonly referred to as a ratio of one would allow employers to supplement bottles. OSHA requests comment on the toilet for every 15 employees, and the required numbers of sewered toilet proposal. Where and to what extent are OSHA will use that terminology. OSHA facilities with either sewered or portable single use drinking water bottles used in adopted this requirement (Table J–1 of toilet facilities. OSHA’s Marine your shipyard? § 1910.141) from the 1968 ANSI Z4.1 Terminals, Longshoring, Construction, OSHA is also considering adding a standard through notice and comment and Field Sanitation standards all requirement to the final standard rulemaking in 1973 (38 FR 10930, 10931 permit the use of portable toilet requiring employers to ensure that (5/3/1973)). It has been part of the facilities (§§ 1917.127(a)(1)(iv); drinking water is ‘‘suitably cool,’’ a general industry standards since that 1918.95(a)(1)(iv); 1926.51(c)(3);

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72483

1928.110(b); see also ANSI Z4.1 §§ 2.9 rule include in order to ensure that would have to be equipped with and 6.4). portable toilet facilities provide a level waterless cleaning agents or soap, water OSHA believes that allowing the use of service close to that provided by (i.e., hot and cold or lukewarm), and of portable toilet facilities in this sewered toilet facilities? hand towels or warm air blowers. manner will enhance employee safety OSHA is considering adding a OSHA requests comment on the and health and will not result in any provision that would require employers proposed exemption. Should OSHA adverse effects. This provision is to provide portable toilet facilities in limit these exemptions in any way? For justified by the significant certain areas where it is unlikely example, with the increasing improvements in portable toilet sewered facilities could be installed availability of waterless cleaning agents, technology in recent years. Portable such as in those areas of the workplace should OSHA require that mobile crews toilet facilities now contain the type of where there is a lack of water or the be provided with such supplies? What equipment necessary to provide for temporary nature of the work makes measures do shipyards currently use to employee health needs at levels installing sewered toilet facilities ensure that mobile crews have approaching that of the existing impracticable. These work areas may immediate access to transportation to standard. For example, many portable include work onboard vessels and nearby toilet facilities? toilet facilities are now manufactured vessel sections and in dry docks. OSHA Paragraph (e) Handwashing with handwashing facilities that include requests comment on whether the final Facilities—Location of handwashing hand towels, waste receptacles, and rule should require employers to facilities. In paragraph (e)(1), OSHA either running water or waterless provide portable toilet facilities in these proposes to add a requirement that cleaning agents. In addition, some types of situations. If not, why not? If so, handwashing facilities be located ‘‘at or portable facilities have flushable toilets in what situations should they be adjacent to each toilet facility,’’ sewered (Ex. 2–3). required? How many portable toilets, at and portable toilet facilities alike. This Allowing the use of portable toilet a minimum, should employers be provision is necessary, in major part, to facilities will encourage employers to required to provide? For instance, ensure that employees’ health needs are provide more facilities than the should OSHA adopt the ratios (i.e., met in those worksites where portable minimum required by the standard. It toilets per employees) established in the toilet facilities are or will be used. Some will enable them to provide such ANSI Z4.3 standard? portable toilet facilities are not additional facilities without incurring OSHA requests comment on the use equipped with handwashing facilities construction expenses and of portable toilet facilities in shipyards. and separate or stand-alone facilities are inconvenience. OSHA believes that by When and where are portable toilet not always placed next to or close to allowing employers to also provide facilities used? What factors determine portable toilets. This is particularly true portable toilets, employers would be how many to provide and when and onboard vessels and vessel sections. more likely to provide toilets in where to provide them? Often, employees must go to landside numbers that are closer to the 1 to 9 Exemption. In paragraphs (d)(4) and facilities, which may be located a ratio in the ANSI Z4.1 and Z4.3 (e)(3), OSHA proposes to combine and significant distance away, to clean their standards (Exs. 3–6; 3–7). retain provisions exempting employers hands. As a result, employees may not Permitting the use of portable toilets from providing toilet and handwashing clean their hands when they are would allow and encourage employers facilities for mobile crews and for exposed to contaminants, after using a to provide facilities in those work employees working in normally portable toilet, or before eating, locations where it is extremely difficult unattended worksites, provided that drinking, or smoking, which puts them if not impracticable to have sewage these employees have immediately at risk of adverse health effects. carriage systems. For example, available transportation to readily OSHA believes the proposed employers could provide them on accessible sanitation facilities that meet performance language gives employers vessels, in dry docks, and in work the requirements of this section. The flexibility in complying and should not locations where local plumbing or availability of vehicles at a worksite pose problems, even at worksites where building codes prohibit installation of does not necessarily mean that the there is a lack of piped water or sewer sewage systems. Allowing the use of employees at that worksite are a lines. Many portable toilet facilities portable toilet facilities also gives ‘‘mobile crew.’’ OSHA has interpreted manufactured today contain either employers more flexibility in the term ‘‘mobile crew’’ to be limited to handwashing facilities or waterless responding to changing workplace employees who continually or cleaning agents. In addition, portable, conditions. For example, it allows frequently move from jobsite to jobsite stand-alone hand cleaning facilities are employers to respond quickly when on a daily or hourly basis and to available and can be placed adjacent to work moves from location to location exclude employees who report to a portable toilet facilities. A single stand- within the shipyard. worksite for days, weeks, or longer (Ex. alone handwashing facility may be able Finally, OSHA believes that allowing 2–21; OSHA letter of interpretation to to serve several portable toilet facilities portable toilet facilities will enhance Nicolas Mertz, June 7, 2002). that are placed in one location. OSHA employee safety and health because it For the purposes of these exceptions, requests comment on the proposal. makes these facilities more accessible ‘‘immediately available transportation’’ Hand cleaning agents. OSHA and thus more likely to be used. As means that the vehicle is already at the proposes in paragraph (e)(2) to revise mentioned, this is particularly specific worksite or can be summoned the existing requirements important in work areas onboard quickly enough so employees are able to (§ 1910.141(d)(2)(ii) and (iii)) to allow vessels, where a significant portion of get to facilities quickly. OSHA has handwashing facilities to be equipped shipyard employees work and where interpreted ‘‘nearby’’ facilities as being with either (1) soap and hot and cold or sewered facilities may not be within ten minutes of the employees lukewarm running water, or (2) practicable. work area (Ex. 2–21). Nearby toilet waterless cleaning agents. The existing OSHA requests comment on the facilities must be in clean, sanitary and standard, as well as most of OSHA’s proposed requirements for portable serviceable condition, and adequate for other sanitation standards, requires that toilet facilities. What additional the number of employees who need to handwashing facilities have soap and requirements, if any, should the final use them. Nearby handwashing facilities running water (§§ 1910.141(d)(2)(ii) and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72484 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

(iii), 1910.142(f)(3), 1917.127(a)(1)(i) soap. Therefore, based on recent Section 1915.89 Control of Hazardous and (ii), 1918.95(a)(1)(i) and (ii), information and evidence, OSHA Energy (Lockout/Tagout) 1928.110(b)). However, the Bloodborne believes there is a practical need to In § 1915.89, OSHA proposes to add Pathogens standard permits the use of allow the use of waterless cleaning and requirements addressing the control of alternatives (e.g., antiseptic hand decontamination products in shipyards. hazardous energy (lockout/tagout) cleaners) in limited circumstances OSHA requests comment on the during the servicing of machines, proposal to allow the optional use of (§ 1910.1030(d)(2)(iii) and (iv)). equipment and systems. The approach OSHA has not proposed that the use waterless cleaning agents. In your OSHA is proposing to adopt is that of of waterless cleaning agents be limited establishment, to what extent are the general industry standard to those situations in which the lack of waterless cleaning agents used? If (§ 1910.147), with minor revisions. (The water or the temporary nature of the waterless cleaners are used, have they general industry standard does not installation makes running water been received favorably by employees, apply to shipyard employment.) The impracticable. OSHA does not believe and have employees experienced any following discussion covers the need for the limitation is necessary since it is problems with the cleaners (e.g., allergic a comprehensive lockout/tagout rule in likely that waterless agents will be used reaction)? shipyards, why OSHA is proposing to most often in conjunction with portable Paragraph (j) Vermin control—OSHA toilet facilities. Whatever cleaning proposes to revise the application of the adopt the general industry approach, the agents are used, the employer will be existing requirement (§ 1910.141(a)(5)) requirements of the general industry responsible for ensuring that they are on vermin control to make the provision standard, and the differences between effective in disinfecting the skin or more appropriate to shipyard proposed § 1915.89 and § 1910.147. In removing the contaminants to which employment. The existing requirement addition, this section includes an in- employees are exposed. In addition, the to clean and maintain the workplace in depth discussion of the application of employer must select waterless agents a manner that prevents the harborage of the lockout/tagout standard while that will not result in absorption of vermin only applies to ‘‘enclosed’’ servicing commercial vessels, such as contaminants, sensitization of the skin, workplaces. Proposed paragraph (j)(1) fish processing vessels. While OSHA or other adverse health effects. would extend its application by welcomes comments on any and all In OSHA’s rulemaking on Bloodborne requiring the employer to take those aspects of the proposed standard, the Pathogens, a number of organizations, steps necessary to control vermin discussion also includes specific issues including the Association for throughout the shipyard. Thus, for which OSHA is seeking comment on Professionals in Infection Control employers would need to expand their the proposal. (APIC), the American Red Cross, Johns vermin control efforts to include The need for a comprehensive Hopkins University, and the American outdoor worksites. Evidence in the lockout/tagout standard in shipyards. Society of Microbiology, supported record shows that employees working at OSHA believes that a comprehensive allowing the use of waterless cleaners in outdoor worksites, as well as in rule protecting shipyard employees those situations in which water was not enclosed spaces, need to be protected from hazardous energy during servicing, available (56 FR 64004, 64116–17 (12/6/ from the hazards associated with maintenance and repair operations is 1991)). The National Institute for exposure to vermin (Ex. 2–12). For needed for several reasons. First, Occupational Safety and Health example, employees working near water information in the record indicates that (NIOSH) said antiseptic hand cleaners are at risk of disease if mosquito potential hazardous energy exposures and disposable disinfectant towelettes populations are not adequately are present throughout shipyard also were effective alternatives for soap controlled. In addition, birds and employment, on vessels and vessel and water for employees working in rodents can transmit disease directly sections as well as in landside areas where there is a lack of running and through their feces (see http:// operations (Exs. 9, 11). Servicing water (56 FR 64116). Based on the www.hhs.gov and http://www.cdc.gov operations, which include activities evidence in the record, OSHA accepted for information on vermin related such as constructing, installing and the use of alternative hand cleaning diseases). repairing equipment, are some of the methods as an interim measure when At the same time, OSHA recognizes riskiest operations in shipyard soap and water are not feasible (e.g., that it is not possible to prevent all employment. For example, employees firefighters, EMTs, police, paramedics). vermin, especially birds and insects, servicing ship’s systems face As noted in Table 3 above, the present from entering outdoor worksites. considerable risk of injury from record contains several studies Therefore, the proposal retains the energization of those systems because conducted since that time, all of which existing provision requiring employers they are often large and complex, and further support the efficacy of waterless to take only those steps that are frequently have multiple power sources. cleansers. Recent studies also show that ‘‘reasonably practicable’’ to prevent the That risk is compounded further when waterless cleaners such as alcohol-based harborage of vermin. ships’ crews and outside contractors hand rubs reduce the number of bacteria In paragraph (j)(2), OSHA proposes to also work onboard the vessel, which is on the hand more effectively than soap retain unchanged the existing a common occurrence. and water (Ex. 2–24). Alcohol gels, for requirement (§ 1910.141(a)(5)) that There are numerous injuries and instance, have been found to have employers implement and maintain an fatalities in shipyard employment that excellent immediate antimicrobial effective control program where vermin would be prevented by an effective effects and may reduce skin irritation are detected. OSHA proposes to define lockout/tagout program. According to that can occur from frequent washing ‘‘vermin’’ to include insects, birds, and 2002 data from the BLS annual survey with soap and water (Ex. 2–22). other animals, such as rodents and feral of occupational injuries and illnesses, in However, in certain circumstances they cats (proposed § 1915.95). 30.3 percent of the shipyard injury and may accelerate the absorption of OSHA requests comment on the illness cases involving days away from contaminants through the skin. proposed vermin control provisions. work, the case resulted from contact A number of shipyard operations are What vermin are present and what types with an object or equipment, and 1.8 done at worksites where it may be of controls are used to prevent their percent of the cases resulted from being difficult to provide running water and harborage in shipyard worksites? caught in equipment. According to BLS

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72485

CFOI data from 1993–2002, 10 shipyard tested before work began. By following Third, a lockout/tagout rule is needed fatalities (6.3%) resulted from contact the proposed provisions for applying because the existing lockout/tagout with electrical current and 31 fatalities lockout/tagout devices and verification provisions currently applicable to (19.5%) occurred because of contact of isolation, this fatality may have been shipyard employment (§§ 1910.331– with objects and equipment. OSHA’s prevented. .335, 1915.162–.164, 1915.181) do not IMIS database also indicates that there • In 1990, an employee was killed provide comprehensive or adequate have been numerous fatalities in while replacing an electric motor on a protection for shipyard employees. For shipyards that the proposed (lockout/ crane because the crane’s brake was not example, most of the existing provisions tagout) provisions could prevent. Some locked. When the crane motor was in part 1915 only address a limited of these fatalities are discussed below. unbolted, its drum and gear started number of servicing operations onboard • In 2000, one employee was killed spinning due to stored energy in the vessels and do not address hazardous when he was crushed by a steering crane’s cables and weights. The energy in landside operations. mechanism. Four employees were employee was struck with flying parts Conversely, the applicable general repairing the steering mechanism on a and killed. The proposed provisions industry electrical safety requirements tow boat, which functions from would have ensured that before (§§ 1910.331–.335) apply only to electricity and hydraulics. The beginning work the energy would have landside operations and when shore- electricity was deenergized and secured, been isolated, the machine deenergized, based electrical installations provide but the residual energy from the and the deenergization verified. power for use aboard vessels, and do not hydraulics was not relieved and cover qualified persons working on a rendered safe. The proposed provisions Second, the proposal is needed vessel’s permanently installed electrical for stored energy may have prevented because the comprehensive general system. this fatality. industry lockout/tagout standard • In 1999, an employee installing a exempts ‘‘maritime employment’’ from The requirements in the existing support cable was electrocuted when he its scope (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)). In the applicable provisions also are not as came into contact with the energized preamble to the final general industry protective as the comprehensive high-voltage line that he was servicing. standard, OSHA explained that procedures and requirements in the A secondary switch that should have shipyard employment was excluded not general industry standard. The existing been locked open to deenergize an because working conditions were less provisions in part 1915 establish electrical panel had been left closed. hazardous, which the discussion above specific, but isolated, practices for The proposed procedures to isolate and demonstrates, but rather because the controlling hazardous energy and none verify deenergization may have unique nature of this industry and the establish a comprehensive program for prevented this accident. means to minimize injury to employees addressing those risks. For example, • In 1998, a shipyard employee was required additional analysis and none of the existing part 1915 killed and another seriously injured consideration, which had not been provisions require written lockout/ when an elevator was energized while adequately addressed during the tagout procedures, employee training, they were working under the edge of the lockout/tagout rulemaking (FR 36644, verification of deenergization or flight deck on an aircraft carrier. 36657–58 (9/1/1989)). As a result, isolation, or periodic inspection, all of Movement of the elevator during OSHA had insufficient information which the general industry standard about hazardous energy in shipyard servicing could have been prevented if requires (see Table 5). the elevator energy isolating device had employment and about whether the been locked or tagged out. general industry approach would The existing applicable lockout/tagout • In 1996, an employee was killed address those hazards effectively. OSHA provisions also do not provide a and another was burned while checking said it would continue to review consistent approach. As Table 5 shows, a hydraulic power unit. The hose of the information on hazardous energy in the provisions have a range of different test gauge came in contact with an shipyard employment, evaluate the approaches for shutting off, isolating exposed, energized conductor in the need to initiate rulemaking, and and securing or otherwise protecting motor start panel, which caused the determine whether the general industry employees from reenergization. For hose to rupture and ignite the hydraulic rule, or an appropriate modification of example, when employees work on fluid. Under the proposed lockout/ that rule, would provide optimal ship’s boilers they must tagout and tagout provisions, this accident could protection for shipyard employees. provide a second isolation of the energy, have been prevented because all OSHA also said the Agency would while employees working on electrical systems would have been deenergized present these matters to SESAC for machinery must tagout and check the and deenergization would have been consideration as part of the committee’s energy at the point of work. The verified. review of shipyard standards. In 1993, proposed shipyard lockout/tagout • In 1996, an employee was killed after discussing the issues at length, standard would establish uniform while working inside a 480-volt SESAC recommended that OSHA adopt minimum procedures that shipyard electrical cabinet. The disconnecting a comprehensive lockout/tagout employers would have to follow in all means for the cabinet were not properly standard (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. shipyard servicing operations to protect identified, and the cabinet was not 104X). their employees.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72486 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules Periodic required? inspection Written required? procedure

training required? Employee TANDARDS S ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes. work? at point of Required to check energy AGOUT .. Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes. /T .... No ...... No ...... No ...... No...... No ...... No ...... No ...... No...... No ...... No ...... No ...... No...... No ...... No ...... No ...... No. required? OCKOUT verification L Deenergization Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... Yes ...... No ...... NoNo ...... No ...... No. No ...... No ...... No ...... No. No ...... No. Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... No ...... No. * ’’ HIPYARD under S control isolations employee ‘‘ Number of isolation required Layers of NDUSTRY AND I ENERAL G used? Second isolation tagout device required when required to OMPARISON OF secure energy isolating device C — 5. ABLE T ...... Tag ...... Yes ...... 2 ...... 1 Tag ...... Yes ...... 2 ...... 2 ...... Tag ...... Yes ...... 1 ...... 2 ...... Tagout Program ...... Tag ...... Usually ...... Usually 2Welded Valves ...... 0 Or 1 Lock & Tag ...... Yes Yes ...... 2 Yes ...... Electrical Breaker 2 ...... Electrical Fuse Tag No ...... Tag Yes ...... Yes 1 ...... 2 1 ...... 1 No ...... No ...... Steam ...... Lock & Tag ..... Yes ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... No ...... Lockout Program ...... Lock ...... Not Applicable 1 ...... 1 ...... Yes ...... means either a lock or an employee-made isolation layer. ’’ Source/standard Means Propul- ’ s Boilers Bolted Valves ...... s Piping Tag ...... Yes ...... 2 ...... 1 ...... ’ ’ control ‘‘ 1910.147, which exempts maritime employment, requires a comprehensive lockout/tagout program. § ** Only * Employee Systems. sion Machinery. dustry lockout tagout. Electrical. Electrical Machinery. 1910.147** General In- 1915.162 Ship 1915.163 Ship 1915.164 Ships 1915.181 Subpart L § Part 1910 Subpart S § § § §

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72487

Why OSHA is proposing to adopt the and energization procedures, and not plants and motor vehicle assembly general industry approach? Based on a just the application of locks or tags, is operations (65 FR 38303). The standard review of the information and what ensures that employees are has been used to protect employees consultations with SESAC, the Agency adequately protected (54 FR 36655). manufacturing sophisticated is proposing to adopt, with limited Locks and tags are applied after transportation equipment, such as train modifications, the same approach and machines or equipment have been locomotives, aircraft and space vehicles. requirements as the general industry isolated. If equipment is not properly The general industry standard has also lockout/tagout standard. OSHA believes isolated and the procedures for been applied in the manufacturing of this approach is appropriate for several deenergization and verification are not complex military equipment, such as reasons. First, the general industry followed, neither application of a lock tanks, weapons systems and guided standard has provided effective nor a tag will fully ensure employees are missiles. protection for affected employees. A protected. This is especially true where Similar to ship’s systems, some lookback review of the general industry systems, such as ship’s systems, are equipment and systems used in general standard, conducted pursuant to Section complex, have several energy sources, industry have multiple sources and 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 or are serviced at the same time by types of energy, back-up energy sources, U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and Section 5 of many employees or crews who may and separate circuits for critical power Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 concluded work for different employers. needs (e.g., lighting). In addition, that the standard had been effective in The comprehensive isolation and servicing operations in various general reducing fatalities (65 FR 38302 (6/20/ deenergization procedures in the industry workplaces involve systems 2002)). The review also concluded that general industry standard are also that may be located far away from the standard did not impose a important where systems are not system energy sources, just as energy significant impact on small business. capable of being locked out, which is sources of ship’s systems are often In addition to these analyses, the situation for many ship’s systems located landside. Both general industry commenters who participated in the since shipyard employers do not own and shipyard servicing operations often lookback review, including companies the ship’s systems they service. In involve contractors, work on equipment (e.g., Bell Atlantic and Kodak), unions addition, the procedures the standard and systems the employer does not own, (e.g., United Auto Workers, United Steel requires address conditions that are and have great variations in the Workers of America, and the commonly present in shipyards, equipment and systems being serviced. International Brotherhood of Electrical including multiple employer worksites Even though there may be some Workers), employer groups (e.g., and group servicing operations by unique conditions in shipyards, OSHA Organization Resources Counselors, multiple crews. Because of the range of believes that the flexibility of the Inc.), and professional societies (e.g., the workplace factors present in shipyard general industry standard ensures that it American Society of Safety Engineers), servicing operations, OSHA believes the will be effective in controlling stated that the standard had been comprehensive energy procedures in the hazardous energy in shipyard servicing effective in saving lives and preventing general industry standard are necessary operations. OSHA requests comment on injuries. Most comments supported and appropriate to ensure that shipyard the proposal to apply the general continuation of the standard because it employees are adequately protected. industry lockout/tagout standard to had been effective in achieving its Moreover, adopting the standard’s shipyard employment. Are there any employee protection goals (65 FR employee training requirements will unique conditions in shipyards that 38304). help to ensure that employees make the general industry standard Second, many shipyard employers understand and adhere to the energy incompatible or inapplicable to already have implemented lockout/ control procedures. shipyard employment? If so, please tagout programs modeled on the general Fourth, OSHA believes that the describe those conditions. The industry standard, and have reported general industry standard is appropriate performance-based approach of the that these programs have been effective because shipyard employment also general industry standard gives in reducing the risk of harm associated includes landside operations, which are employers flexibility in determining the with servicing operations. In addition, quite similar to general industry type of energy control procedures that SESAC recommended using the worksites. Landside facilities, such as would most effectively protect shipyard proposed general industry approach as metal fabrication shops, machine shops, employees who are servicing particular the framework for a recommended electrical shops, sheet metal shops, and machines, equipment and systems. This lockout/tagout rule for shipyards paint shops, are analogous to general flexibility will also allow shipyard (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. 104X, p). industry shops performing the same employers to tailor their energy control Third, OSHA believes that the types of work. Thus, the general procedures so they adequately address comprehensive energy control industry requirements are readily specific conditions that may have procedures, which are the cornerstone applicable and appropriate for those unique applications in shipyard of the general industry standard, are operations. servicing operations. particularly appropriate for addressing Fifth, OSHA believes the general Adopting a lockout/tagout rule for the types of workplace conditions and industry standard will be effective in shipyards that is consistent with the hazardous energy that are present in controlling hazardous energy in general industry requirements has shipyard employment. The complex shipyard work environments several advantages. Colleges and safety comprehensive procedures consist and in servicing complex ship’s systems and health training providers have primarily of steps for deenergization, because the standard has proven trained large numbers of safety and isolation of equipment from energy effective under the same types of health professionals on the general sources, and verification of complex conditions found in general industry standard. Having similar deenergization before servicing industry. The general industry lockout/ standards for shipyards would help to operations are begun. OSHA believes tagout standard has been applied to ensure that there are adequate numbers that isolation of equipment from the approximately one million facilities, of trained safety and health energy sources in combination with including complex chemical plants, professionals available to help shipyard adherence to established deenergization petroleum refineries, nuclear power employers as they implement the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72488 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

standard. It would also ensure that the cleaning a vat used to process fish paste Coast Guard/OSHA authority over numerous lockout/tagout publications onboard a fish processing vessel, was vessels. Both OSHA and the U.S. Coast and outreach materials OSHA has seriously injured when the augers at the Guard have authority for the safety and developed for the general industry bottom of the vat suddenly started up. health of employees onboard vessels. standard are useable and immediately The churning augers trapped the The Coast Guard has statutory authority available to help shipyards comply with employee’s feet and legs and drew them to prescribe and enforce regulations the provisions and protect their into the machinery. It took coworkers affecting safety and health onboard employees. Moreover, it would mean two hours to free the employee from the inspected vessels and has exercised that that the materials NIOSH, the states, and machinery and another half day for a authority. Therefore, OSHA does not private organizations have developed helicopter to arrive and airlift her off the have authority over those vessels (29 for the general industry standard could vessel. The employee was flown to a U.S.C. 653(b)(1); Chao v. Mallard Bay be easily applied to shipyards. hospital in Anchorage, Alaska, where Drilling, Inc. (Mallard Bay), 534 U.S. Control of Hazardous Energy Onboard her legs had to be amputated below the 235 (2002); Ex. 16–6; CPL 02–01–020 Commercial Vessels. OSHA proposes to knees (Ex. 16–3). Coast Guard/OSHA Authority Over include language in both proposed Recently published injury statistics on Vessels, 11/8/1996). However, OSHA § 1915.89 and existing § 1910.147 to the commercial fishing industry also does have authority over uninspected clarify several issues concerning the support the need to address hazardous vessels (hereafter ‘‘commercial vessels’’) application of the hazardous energy energy during servicing operations to the extent that the U.S. Coast Guard standards to servicing operations onboard floating fish factories. A study has not regulated a specific hazard or onboard commercial vessels. In large of serious injuries from 1991–98, working condition (Mallard Bay, 534 part, these proposed additions are in collected by the Alaska Trauma U.S. at 244–45; Ex. 16–6). Almost all response to recent events that have Registry, determined that injuries vessels used in the fish processing raised concerns about how OSHA related to fish processing equipment industry are uninspected, therefore they covers the serious hazards associated onboard vessels were the leading cause are within OSHA’s authority (Ex. 16–6). with servicing of equipment and of injury in the industry (Ex. 16–5). Moreover, to date, the Coast Guard has systems on fish processing vessels. These injuries accounted for more than not regulated the control of hazardous Fish processing vessels, often called one half of all injuries reported and energy during the servicing and ‘‘floating fish factories,’’ are commercial many could have been prevented by maintenance of equipment on vessels that eviscerate, clean and implementing programs to control commercial vessels. Therefore, OSHA prepare fresh, frozen and canned hazardous energy and applying lockout/ has authority to regulate hazardous seafood. Generally, fish processing tagout systems during servicing. energy onboard commercial vessels. vessels perform the same operations and In light of these incidents, OSHA (OSHA notes that the Coast Guard has use the same types of equipment as proposes to change its existing policy on issued a limited regulation on machine landside fish processing plants; they guarding during production operations. just do so at sea. These vessels usually the coverage of servicing and maintenance activities onboard See 46 CFR 28.215; 56 FR 40364, 40374 set anchor in fishing grounds for weeks (8/14/1991) (’’Running machinery is or months at a time, processing fish and commercial vessels, particularly fish processing vessels. In short, OSHA required to have hand covers, guards or seafood that fishing boats unload onto railings to reduce the chance of proposes adding language to § 1915.89 them (Ex. 16–1). Some vessels, known personnel being inured while working and § 1910.147 specifying that: as catcher/processors, also catch the around the moving gears, belts, and • Proposed § 1915.89 applies to the seafood they process (Exs.16–1 through chains’’). 16–3). Fish processing equipment servicing of ship’s systems by any Where OSHA has authority over onboard these vessels, as in landside employee, including but not limited to, commercial vessels, the Agency facilities, is specific to the type of ship’s officers and crew of the vessel generally has applied part 1910 seafood being processed. Thus, at the (see proposed § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(A)); • standards to control hazardous working end of each fishing season when the Proposed § 1915.89 applies to the conditions (Ex. 16–6). However, OSHA vessel returns to port new equipment is servicing of machines, equipment and has applied part 1915, and not the installed to process fish that will be systems that employees use in the general industry lockout/tagout caught during the next fishing season course of performing shipyard standard, to controlling hazardous (Ex. 16–2). employment operations (see proposed energy during ‘‘ship repair’’ operations OSHA estimates that there are about § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(B)); and onboard commercial vessels. Ship repair • 200 U.S. fish processing vessels Existing § 1910.147, and not is defined at § 1915.4(j) as ‘‘any repair operating in and traveling through U.S. proposed § 1915.89, applies to the of a vessel including, but not restricted territorial waters (Exs. 16–1; 16–4). servicing of equipment onboard vessels to, alterations, conversions, While the number of employees that is used for inherently general installations, cleaning, painting, and working on fish processing vessels is industry operations such as fish maintenance work.’’ Pursuant to that difficult to ascertain, OSHA estimates processing (see § 1910.147(a) and definition, OSHA has interpreted ship that each vessel employs about 100 to proposed § 1915.89(a)(2)(iii)(C)). repair as including the servicing of all 120 processing employees, who live on Background and current policy. In equipment and systems on commercial the vessel throughout the season, for a order to fully explain OSHA’s proposed vessels, regardless of who performs the total of approximately 2,500 employees changes, it is important to understand operation or whether the equipment is (Ex. 16–2). OSHA’s current policy on the coverage a permanent or inherent part of the The need to address the hazards of commercial vessels. This section vessel or a temporary fixture unrelated associated with servicing fish discusses OSHA and U.S. Coast Guard to the vessel’s core navigation functions processing equipment was brought to authority over vessels, OSHA’s current (Exs. 16–7; 16–8). OSHA’s attention by a serious accident exemption of maritime employment ‘‘Maritime employment’’ exemption. onboard a fish processing vessel from § 1910.147, and OSHA’s current OSHA’s current policy has been derived working in the Bering Sea. On October policy concerning application of from language in the general industry 16, 2005, an employee, who was § 1910.147 to floating fish processors. lockout/tagout standard (§ 1910.147, 54

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72489

FR 36644) and Agency interpretations of servicing ‘‘the factory portion of floating employees, it would mean that part it. The general industry lockout/tagout fish processors’’ (Ex. 16–7). OSHA 1910 standards would apply when they standard explicitly exempts ‘‘maritime responded that the maintenance of ‘‘any process fish and operate the equipment employment’’ from coverage equipment’’ onboard vessels is included for production, but proposed § 1915.89 (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(A)). Although the in the maritime exemption from would apply when they clean or standard and its preamble do not define § 1910.147. OSHA explained that the perform maintenance work on that same maritime employment, in the preamble maritime employment exemption equipment. For employers who have OSHA pointed to shipyard employment, applies to ‘‘shipyard employment,’’ both landside operations and floating longshoring and marine terminals as which includes ‘‘ship repair’’ fish processing facilities, it also would examples (54 FR 36655, 36657–36659). (§§ 1910.15(a), 1915.4(i)). The Agency mean that proposed § 1915.89 would The preamble cited several reasons for concluded that the definition of ship apply to servicing fish processing excluding maritime employment. OSHA repair (‘‘any repair of a vessel including, equipment on vessels, but § 1910.147 said that including maritime but not restricted to, alterations, would apply to servicing the same employment, with its ‘‘unique situations conversions, installations, cleaning, equipment at landside facilities. and work practices * * * would unduly painting, and maintenance work’’) was The second option, applying complicate development of a generic broad enough to include maintenance § 1910.147 to the servicing of fish energy control standard for general work on ‘‘any equipment on a vessel, processing and other inherently general industry’’ (54 FR 36657). OSHA also including fish processing equipment’’ industry equipment onboard vessels, said a lockout/tagout standard likely (Ex. 16–7). will result in more uniform application could be applied quite differently in In the second inquiry, from the Arctic of standards to fish processing and other maritime than in general industry. As a Alaska Fisheries Corporation in 1994, general industry operations onboard result, the general industry rule might OSHA confirmed its previous commercial vessels. To illustrate, this need to be modified considerably in interpretation of the maritime option means that fish processing order to provide optimal protection for employment exemption, again employees, who operate the processing maritime employees. However, the concluding that part 1915 applies to equipment for production and perform process of examining maritime maintenance of any equipment onboard the vast majority of all servicing of that employment and modifying the rule to ‘‘all commercial vessels’’ (Ex. 16–8). equipment, will be uniformly covered address those issues would delay (See also, Ex. 16–9, OSHA’s Shipyard by part 1910 standards during both the providing needed protection for ‘‘Tool Bag’’ Directive CPL 02–00–142, production and servicing operations. millions of general industry employees. confirming the earlier interpretations.) And for fish processing employers, part OSHA also explained that it did not The current OSHA policy embedded in 1910 standards, including § 1910.147, have adequate information in the these interpretations is that fish would apply at both their landside and lockout/tagout record on hazardous processing or other equipment installed vessel-based fish processing operations. energy hazards in shipyard on vessels for any purpose is considered The second option, however, will not employment, marine terminals and part of the vessel; accordingly, repair of result in completely uniform longshoring to support including them that equipment is ship repair under part application of standards onboard in the standard. 1915. vessels. Under option two, proposed In exempting maritime employment, Proposed additions and changes. The § 1915.89 would apply to the servicing OSHA noted that part 1915 has most significant of the additions that of ship’s systems (i.e., systems and provisions that address deenergization OSHA proposes, § 1915.89(a)(2)(iii)(C) equipment that are an inherent and during the servicing of certain vessel and § 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(B), clarify how permanent part of the vessel), while systems and equipment (54 FR 36657). the Agency, in the future, intends to § 1910.147 would apply to the servicing Those provisions, in subparts J and L, cover the control of hazardous energy of inherently general industry pertain to ship’s systems and machinery onboard commercial vessels during the equipment such as fish processing (e.g., § 1915.162 Ship’s boilers; servicing of equipment used for fish equipment. To determine which § 1915.163 Ship’s piping systems; processing and other inherently general lockout/tagout standard applies, fish § 1915.163 Ship’s propulsion industry operations. There are two processing employers would have to machinery) and electrical circuits and options: (1) follow the existing policy of determine first whether the equipment distribution boards (§ 1915.181). classifying such servicing operations as or system is an inherent and permanent Although part 1915 does not define ‘‘ship repair’’ and continue to cover part of the vessel (e.g., propulsion, ‘‘ship’s systems,’’ generally the term is them under proposed § 1915.89, or (2) navigation, electrical, ballast systems) or used to describe systems and equipment classify such servicing as general is used for performing inherently that are an inherent and permanent part industry operations and cover them general industry operations. of a vessel. The provisions in subparts under the general industry lockout/ For several reasons, OSHA believes it J and L do not address the servicing of tagout standard (§ 1910.147). is appropriate to apply § 1910.147, and other types of equipment onboard The first option, applying proposed not proposed § 1915.89, to the servicing vessels, such as fish processing § 1915.89 to all equipment onboard of inherently general industry equipment, and there are no other part commercial vessels, would result in a equipment onboard vessels. First, fish 1915 standards addressing hazardous single standard for servicing operations processing and other general industry energy during the servicing of such onboard vessels. The single standard equipment are not core components of equipment. would apply regardless of whether the a vessel, but rather equipment placed on Interpretation of § 1910.147. After servicing involves ship’s systems or fish a vessel after the core vessel is built. In OSHA issued the general industry processing equipment or whether it is many cases general industry equipment lockout/tagout standard, the Agency done at a shipyard or at sea. In other may only be a temporary fixture on a received two inquiries about its respects, however, this option would vessel. As mentioned, fish processing application to commercial vessels, result in the application of different equipment is changed typically at the specifically fish processing vessels. The standards to fish processing employees end of every fishing season (Ex. 16–2). first inquiry, in 1991, asked OSHA to and employers, which might result in Given that, OSHA does not believe the clarify whether § 1910.147 applies to confusion. For fish processing equipment used to perform inherently

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72490 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

general industry operations is part of the structural systems and systems to care that risk only if all employees working ‘‘vessel’’ or that those servicing for the crew of the vessel. Essentially, on the system are required to follow operations constitute the repair of it. ship’s systems are those systems that them. Applying proposed § 1915.89 to Second, fish processing and other ensure the vessel’s basic operational and all employers and employees working inherently general industry operations navigational capability. on ship’s systems will accomplish that. onboard vessels are more closely OSHA considers the servicing of Applying proposed § 1915.89 to the associated with landside general ship’s systems to be precisely the type servicing of all ship’s systems will also industry operations than with of operation that the term ‘‘ship repair’’ ensure that employees performing those shipbuilding, ship repairing, was intended to cover. Servicing of operations have the most effective shipbreaking and related employment. ship’s systems entails the repair and protection possible. These employees For example, fish processing equipment maintenance of core components of will have the protections of not only onboard vessels is serviced almost vessels. If these components are not § 1915.89, but also the additional energy exclusively by fish processing maintained in proper working order, it control requirements in subparts J and employees and not shipyard employees is unlikely that the vessel will be fully L. Those provisions establish specific or others who regularly service ship’s operational or able to navigate properly. steps that must be taken when servicing systems. This is true regardless of where OSHA believes servicing ship’s systems certain ship’s systems and power the equipment is serviced—at sea, at is at the very heart of shipyard sources, such as blanking piping port, or off the vessel. Rarely, if ever, do employment and proposed § 1915.89 systems, locking or removing fuses, and shipyard employees service fish needs to apply. posting conspicuous warning signs processing or other inherently general OSHA notes that the language in where employees are working. Neither industry equipment. When they do, the proposed § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(A) does not the general industry lockout/tagout servicing is done as part of an overhaul limit coverage to servicing ship’s standard, nor the part 1910 electrical of the entire vessel. At this point, the systems in certain locations. OSHA standards in subpart S, includes entire vessel, including the general intends that § 1915.89 will apply to the requirements directed to specific vessel industry equipment, is out of servicing of ship’s systems regardless of systems (54 FR 36657). OSHA believes commission and the only operations where such servicing occurs (e.g., on a the system-specific protections in being performed on or to the vessel are commercial vessel at sea, at a subparts J and L are necessary for all repair and maintenance. The proposal commercial dock, in a shipyard) or who employees working on ship’s systems to includes language covering this performs it (e.g., shipyard employees, prevent death or serious injury from the situation; specifying that when general contractors, fish processing employees, direct escape of high temperature industry equipment onboard vessels is ship’s crew). (See discussion of ship’s mediums used to power the systems serviced as part of an overhaul of the crew below.) (e.g., steam, water or oil) or from entire vessel proposed § 1915.89 will OSHA believes it is necessary that powerful electrical currents. apply. part 1915 cover the servicing of all Finally, including the issue of OSHA requests comment on the ship’s systems in order to ensure that servicing of ship’s systems in this proposal to apply § 1910.147 to the employees performing those operations rulemaking will ensure that the unique servicing of fish processing and other are adequately protected from hazards those operations pose are fully equipment onboard vessels that is used hazardous energy. Part 1915 was examined and discussed. It also enables for performing inherently general established and its standards are OSHA to properly consider the industry operations. What are the designed to address the ‘‘unique’’ interrelationship between the proposed advantages and disadvantages of this hazards and working conditions lockout/tagout provisions and the proposed approach? Who services associated with working on ship’s specific provisions in subparts J and L, equipment onboard vessels that is used systems, equipment and machinery. The action that OSHA said was necessary in to perform inherently general industry hazards associated with ship’s systems the lockout/tagout rulemaking (54 FR operations? How frequently, if ever, do are particularly serious because these 36657). OSHA requests comment on shipyard employees service general systems can be large, complex, and have applying proposed § 1915.89 to the industry equipment onboard vessels and multiple power sources and isolating servicing of all ship’s systems. Who when does such servicing occur? What devices. The hazards exist regardless of services ship’s systems when the vessel equipment onboard vessels, other than who services the ship’s systems or is at sea? What protection and benefits fish processing equipment, should where the servicing is done. OSHA will result from applying proposed OSHA classify as being used to perform believes that employees servicing ship’s § 1915.89 to the servicing of all ship’s inherently general industry operations? systems can best be protected from systems? Should § 1915.89 or § 1910.147 apply to hazards if such servicing is covered by OSHA also asks for comment on its the servicing of inherently general the standards designed to address the proposed definition of ship’s systems. industry equipment during an overhaul unique hazards and complexity of those What machines, equipment and systems of the entire vessel? Please explain. systems. should the definition include? Does the Servicing of ‘‘ship’s systems.’’ OSHA Applying proposed § 1915.89 to the proposed definition adequately proposes that part 1915 will continue to servicing of all ship’s systems distinguish between systems that are cover the servicing of all ‘‘ship’s establishes a uniform set of standards part of a vessel and equipment that is systems’’ (proposed for these systems, which is particularly used for inherently general industry § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(A)). Proposed necessary to ensure the protection of operations? Are there other approaches § 1915.95 defines ship’s systems as employees involved in multiple- that would more clearly differentiate machines, equipment and systems that employee or multiple-employer between those types of equipment and are a permanent or inherent part of a servicing operations. OSHA notes that systems? Please explain. vessel. These systems, which are the proposal includes additional Machines and equipment used to numerous, include navigation, procedures to further reduce the risk of perform shipyard employment propulsion, power (e.g., electrical, harm for employees performing those operations. In proposed hydraulic, steam), piping, ventilation, types of servicing operations. However, § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(B), OSHA simply communication, waste, ballast, these additional procedures will reduce codifies its existing policy that part

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72491

1915 applies to the servicing of occupational safety and health language meaning of its part 1915 machines and equipment used during standards any established Federal standards, including the coverage the course of performing shipyard standard (29 U.S.C. 655(a)). Pursuant to standards carried over from the employment operations. OSHA this authority, OSHA adopted all LHWCA. Dravo, 613 F.2d at 1232–3. considers these servicing operations to established Federal workplace safety The language at issue in Dravo be ‘‘related employment’’ specified in and health standards in effect as of concerned the location of shipyard the definition of shipyard employment April 28, 1971, that pertained to employment activities, that is, whether (§ 1915.4(i)). For example, the proposal employers, employees and employment part 1915 covered shipbuilding covers the servicing of shore-based covered by the OSH Act (§ 1910.11(a), activities performed at a waterfront power systems used in the construction 36 FR 10466 (5/29/1971)). This included fabrication shop on an island in the of ships, automated blasting equipment the safety and health standards enacted Ohio River. The court looked to the to remove paint from vessels, and under the LHWCA. definitions of ‘‘employer’’ and equipment (e.g., metal working Since OSH Act coverage, which ‘‘employee’’ in § 1915.4, which indicate equipment) in shipyard shops that is extends to employers engaged in the terms are limited to persons engaged used to make or modify vessel business affecting interstate commerce, in shipyard employment ‘‘on the components (e.g., plates, piping). is broader than LHWCA coverage, navigable waters of the United States, Ship’s crew. Proposed OSHA consistently has held that the including dry docks, graving docks and § 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(A) specifies that Agency is not bound by the coverage marine railways’’ (§ 1915.4(c) and (d)). § 1915.89 applies to all servicing of limitations in the LHWCA standards. To (A dry dock is a narrow basin or vessel ship’s systems regardless of who clarify this position, OSHA amended its that can be flooded to allow a vessel to performs it. This means that proposed incorporation by reference of be floated in and then drained so the § 1915.89 applies to ship’s officers, crew established Federal standards (37 FR vessel comes to rest on a dry platform. of commercial vessels, and contractors 26008 (12/7/1972)). Specifically, OSHA A graving dock is a type of dry dock.) that commercial vessel owners and added paragraph (b) to § 1910.11 The court said the plain meaning of the operators hire to service ship’s systems specifying that the Agency was definitions did not include fabrication (collectively referred to as ‘‘ship’s incorporating ‘‘only substantive rules shops (‘‘they include only water, docks, crew’’). affecting safety and health’’ from and marine railways’’ Id.), and declined The proposed provision explicitly established Federal standards (37 FR to construe the definitions more clarifies longstanding OSHA policy that 26008). ‘‘The incorporations by broadly: reference of Parts 1915, 1916, 1917, part 1915 applies whenever ship’s crew [A]n occupational safety and health performs ship repairing operations. That 1918 * * * are not intended to include the discussion in those parts of the standard must give an employer fair warning said, OSHA is including the issue in of the conduct it prohibits or requires * * * this rulemaking in order to address coverage of the Longshoremen’s and To strain the plain and natural meaning of concerns that certain courts have raised Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act words for the purpose of alleviating a about part 1915’s coverage provisions. *** ’’ (§ 1910.11(b)). OSHA explained perceived safety hazard is to delay the day Although § 1910.15(a) specifies that that when it adopted the LHWCA safety when the occupational safety and health part 1915 applies to ‘‘every employment and health rules the Agency had ‘‘no regulations will be written in clear and intention of incorporating [into OSHA concise language so that employers will be and place of employment of every better able to understand and observe them employee engaged in ship repairing, rules] * * * any other rules having special applicability under the laws * * * The responsibility to promulgate clear shipbreaking, and shipbuilding, or under which the ‘established Federal and unambiguous standards is upon the related employment,’’ some language in standards’ were initially adopted’’ (37 Secretary. The test is not what he might part 1915 suggests that the part does not possibly have intended, but what he said. Id. FR 26008). OSHA reiterated its position cover certain shipyard employment when the Agency consolidated the ship The Dravo court concluded that if activities or employees. Specifically, repairing, shipbuilding and OSHA intends a different coverage § 1915.4(d) states: shipbreaking standards into part 1915 scheme, the Agency must amend part The term employee means any person Shipyard Employment (47 FR 16984, 1915 through rulemaking. Id. Although engaged in ship repairing, shipbuilding, 16986 (4/20/1982)). OSHA disagrees with the Dravo shipbreaking or related employments * * * The Occupational Safety and Health decision, to avoid confusion OSHA is other than the master, ship’s officers, crew of Review Commission accepted the expressly stating the applicability of the vessel, or any person engaged by the approach OSHA delineated in proposed § 1915.89. Specifically, master to repair any vessel under 18 net tons. § 1910.11(b) (Dravo Corporation, 7 proposed § 1915.89 will apply to the Section 1915.4 was brought over from O.S.H. Cas. (BNA) 2089 (1980)). OSHA servicing of ship’s systems by any the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ also has taken this position in the courts employee, including ship’s officers and Compensation Act (LHWCA) (33 U.S.C. of appeals, however, three circuits have crew of the vessel (§ 1915.89(a)(2)(i)(A)). 901 et seq.), which, along with the OSH rejected OSHA’s approach and applied (Similarly, in the proposal OSHA also Act, provides OSHA with rulemaking the more restrictive language and has clarified that subpart F applies authority over shipyard employment. limitations of the LHWCA provisions to ‘‘regardless of geographic location,’’ Prior to enactment of the OSH Act, the cases arising under the OSH Act. even though the language of § 1915.4 Secretary of Labor, pursuant to authority Tidewater Pacific, Inc. v. Herman, 160 limits ‘‘employer’’ to persons engaged in under LHWCA, promulgated F.3d 1239 (9th Cir. 1998); Kopcynski v. shipyard employment ‘‘on the navigable occupational safety and health The Jacqueline, 742 F.2d 555 (9th Cir. waters.’’) standards for shipbuilding to protect the 1984); Clary v. Ocean Drilling and The reasons for applying § 1915.89 to life, health and safety of shipyard Exploration Co., 609 F.2d 1120 (5th Cir. ship’s crew have been discussed above employees (33 U.S.C. 941(a)). 1980); Dravo Corporation v. OSHRC, and need not be repeated. OSHA When Congress enacted the OSH Act 613 F.2d 1227 (3rd Cir. 1980). believes that applying § 1915.89 to in 1970, they authorized OSHA, within The court of appeals held in Dravo ship’s crew should not come as a the first two years after the effective date that, notwithstanding § 1910.11(b), surprise to employers since OSHA has of the OSH Act, to promulgate as OSHA would be held to the plain consistently applied part 1915

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72492 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

whenever ship’s crew engage in to apply the general industry standard operations because they also can expose shipyard employment (Ex. 16–9). to shipyard employment in the same employees to hazardous energy. The Moreover, OSHA believes that the manner as it applies to general industry, standard does not apply in the following proposal to apply consistent coverage to except for the proposed changes situations: ship’s crew should reduce any described below. The preamble to the • Servicing or maintaining cord and confusion related to the split in the general industry lockout/tagout plug connected electrical equipment, courts. OSHA requests comment on the standard includes a detailed provided that the hazards are capable of proposed provision. explanation of each of the standard’s being controlled by unplugging the Clarification of ‘‘maritime specific requirements, how they apply, equipment from the energy source and employment’’ exemption in § 1910.147. and why they were adopted (54 FR the plug being under the exclusive OSHA proposes two technical revisions 36654–83). OSHA is incorporating that control of the employee performing the to the scope and application section of document and the record of that service and/or maintenance; • § 1910.147. The revisions clarify the rulemaking into this record. Therefore, Hot tap operations that involve meaning of the maritime employment OSHA will not repeat that discussion transmission and distribution systems exemption and provide notification of and instead will provide a short for gas, steam, water, or petroleum the proposed additions and policy overview of the general industry products when they are performed on changes discussed above. As mentioned, requirements. pressurized pipelines, provided that the general industry lockout/tagout The general industry standard continuity of service is essential, standard exempted ‘‘maritime establishes minimum performance shutdown of the system is impractical, employment’’ (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(A)). requirements for the control of documented procedures are followed, Although the standard did not define hazardous energy. The rule requires and employees are provided with maritime employment, OSHA has that, before service or maintenance is alternative protection that is equally performed, machinery and equipment effective; and traditionally used the term as shorthand • for the employment covered by parts must be turned off and disconnected Servicing or maintaining machines, equipment or systems onboard vessels 1915, 1917 and 1918. To eliminate from the energy source, the energy- that are inherently general industry possible confusion, OSHA proposes in isolating device must be either locked or operations. This would include § 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(B) to replace the tagged out, and the deenergization must operations such as fish processing shorthand term with reference to the be verified. Scope and application (§ 1910.147(a), (proposed § 1915.89(a)(3)(iii)). specific parts. As discussed earlier, proposed To clarify the exclusion from part proposed § 1915.89(a)). The general industry Lockout/Tagout standard § 1915.89 will now also cover all ship’s 1915 of servicing of inherently general systems and all employees. industry equipment, OSHA proposes to ‘‘covers the servicing and maintenance of machines and equipment in which Normal production operations add the following note to the unexpected energization or start up (proposed § 1915.89(a)(2)(ii)). Although § 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(B): of the machines or equipment, or release OSHA recognizes that machines and Section 1910.147 applies to the servicing of of stored energy could cause injury to equipment present many hazardous equipment onboard vessels that is used for employees’’ (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(i)). In situations during normal production inherently general industry operations such proposed § 1915.89(a), OSHA is operations (i.e., whenever machines and as fish processing. However, if such servicing adopting this scope and application equipment are used to perform their is part of a general overhaul and repair of the usual production function), the scope of entire vessel, part 1915 applies. with a few changes. The proposal does not include the term ‘‘unexpected’’ that the standard is servicing and The proposed revisions do not affect is used in describing the energization maintenance operations. Hazards the substantive requirements of and startup the general industry associated with normal production are § 1910.147. OSHA requests comment. standard covers. The proposal also covered by rules in other general Economic analysis. OSHA notes that makes more explicit that the standard industry and shipyard standards, such its preliminary economic analysis, a also applies to ‘‘systems.’’ (These as the requirements for general machine summary of which is included in this changes are discussed below in the guarding (§ 1910.212), guarding power preamble, includes compliance costs for section on the differences between transmission apparatus (§ 1910.219), shipyards and shipyard contractors to proposed § 1915.89 and § 1910.147.) and guarding tools and related implement proposed § 1915.89. It does The standard defines ‘‘servicing and/ equipment used in shipyard not include the costs of fish processing or maintenance’’ (hereafter collectively employment (§§ 1915.131 and employers to comply with proposed referred to as ‘‘servicing’’) as workplace 1915.134). § 1915.89. This is because the economic activities such as constructing, OSHA recognizes that some servicing analysis for the general industry installing, setting up, adjusting, activities that occur during normal lockout/tagout rulemaking included the inspecting, modifying, maintaining, and production, such as making fine compliance costs for implementing the servicing machines, equipment and adjustments to equipment, must be standard in activities other than systems (hereafter collectively referred performed with the power on. This may shipyard employment. It included to as ‘‘equipment’’)(§ 1910.147(b) and include certain aspects of compliance costs for the fish processing proposed § 1915.95). Servicing and troubleshooting, for example, checking industry, which includes fish maintenance activities are a necessary to ensure that the source of a production processing onboard vessels. OSHA part of the industrial process. They are problem has been corrected. The invites comment on whether there are needed to maintain the ability of standard exempts from coverage these additional costs for controlling machines, equipment, systems and servicing activities during normal hazardous energy on fish processing processes to perform their intended production, provided that they are vessels that the economic analysis for functions. Additionally, installation, routine, repetitive and integral to the § 1910.147 may not have included. If so, construction, set-up, changeover, and use of the production equipment. please explain what those costs involve. dismantling are necessary and However, the employer must provide The requirements of the proposed continuous industrial processes. The employees with alternative means of § 1915.89 standard. OSHA is proposing standard covers these types of protection while performing these

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72493

activities and follow the standard’s Written energy control procedures energy after shut down that could lockout/tagout procedures when (§ 1910.147(c)(4), proposed endanger employees; (2) the machine, servicing occurs with the power off. § 1915.89(b)(4)). The standard requires equipment or system has a single energy In certain circumstances, however, that written energy control procedures source which can be readily identified some hazards encountered during be developed, documented, and used to and isolated; (3) the isolation and normal production operations may be control potentially hazardous energy locking out of that energy source will covered by the lockout/tagout rule. sources whenever employees perform completely deenergize and deactivate Servicing and maintenance performed activities covered by the standard. The the machine, equipment or system; (4) during or as part of normal production written procedures must identify the the machine, equipment or system is operations (e.g., lubricating, cleaning or information that employees must know isolated from that energy source and unjamming machines and equipment) in order to control hazardous energy locked out during servicing or are covered by the lockout/tagout during servicing. maintenance; (5) a single lockout device standard when any of the following The energy control procedures must will achieve a locked-out condition; (6) conditions occurs: outline the scope, purpose, the lockout device is under the • The employee must either remove authorization, rules and techniques that exclusive control of the authorized or bypass machine guards or other will be used to control hazardous energy employee performing the servicing or safety devices, resulting in exposure to sources, as well as the means that will maintenance; (7) the servicing or hazards at the point of operation; be used to enforce compliance. At a maintenance does not create hazards for • The employee is required to place minimum, each procedure must include other employees; and (8) the employer, the following elements: in utilizing this exception, has had no any part of his or her body in contact • with the point of operation of the A statement on how the procedure accidents involving the activation or operational machine or piece of will be used; reenergization of the machine, • The procedural steps needed to equipment; or equipment or system during servicing or shut down, isolate, block, and secure • The employee is required to place maintenance. equipment; Energy-isolating devices (locks and any part of his or her body into a danger • The steps designating the zone associated with the operating cycle tags) (§ 1910.147(c)(2) and (3), proposed placement, removal, and transfer of § 1915.89(b)(2) and (3)). A primary tool of the equipment. lockout/tagout devices, and who has the for providing protection under the Energy control program responsibility for them; and standard is the energy-isolating device, (§ 1910.147(c), proposed § 1915.89(b)). • The specific requirements for the mechanism that prevents the The lockout/tagout standard requires testing equipment to determine and transmission or release of energy and to that the employer establish an energy verify the effectiveness of locks, tags, which locks or tags are attached. This control program to ensure that and other energy control measures. device guards against equipment start- equipment is isolated and inoperative The standard requires that employers up or re-energization of equipment before any employee performs service or develop clear and specific written during servicing. There are two types of maintenance where the energization, energy control procedures that have the energy-isolating devices: Those that are start up, or release of stored energy level of detail necessary to ensure that capable of being locked and those that could occur and cause injury. The employees know what steps and are not. program must include (1) documented techniques they must follow to be When the energy-isolating device energy control procedures; (2) an protected from hazardous energy. cannot be locked, the standard requires employee training program; and, (3) Although procedures must be written in that the employer use a tagout system. periodic inspections of the energy detail, the standard does not require A tagout system consists of the required control procedures. Employers have the separate procedures be written for each energy control procedures and extensive flexibility to develop a program and and every piece of equipment (54 FR initial and periodic reinforcement procedures that meet the needs of their 36670). Thus, if the procedures and training, including training on the particular workplace and the particular information are the same for various limitation of tags (see training types of equipment being maintained or equipment or if other logical groupings discussion below). However, where an serviced. exist, then a single set of procedures energy-isolating device is lockable, the Although the energy control program may be sufficient. However, if standard requires that lockout be used applies to all employees, it is directed equipment is not the same or other unless the employer can show that the primarily at those who have the greatest conditions are present that require use of a tagout system provides ‘‘full exposure to hazardous energy— specific consideration, such as multiple employee protection’’ equivalent to that authorized and affected employees. The energy sources or different means of obtained by using a lockout program (54 standard defines ‘‘authorized connection, then the employer must FR 36655). employees’’ as those employees who develop specific energy control ‘‘Full employee protection’’ means apply lockout/tagout devices and who procedures to address them and ensure that the employer affixes the tagout perform servicing operations employees are protected. For example, if device at the same location that the lock (§ 1910.147(b), proposed § 1915.95). a system requires that a unique would have been attached and ‘‘Affected employees’’ include shutdown sequence be followed, demonstrates that the tagout program employees who operate, for normal specific energy control procedures will provides equivalent protection. To production, the machines or equipment be required for that system. demonstrate that equivalent protection on which service is being performed as The standard includes an exception to is provided, the employer must well as those employees whose job the requirement to have written control demonstrate full compliance with all duties require them to work in the area procedures for particular equipment. A tagout-related provisions, including the where the servicing is being performed. written procedure is not required for additional tagout training requirements, The definition also specifies that an equipment if all of the following exist: and implement ‘‘additional elements as affected employee becomes an (1) The machine, equipment or system are necessary to provide equivalent authorized employee when he performs has no potential for stored or residual safety.’’ This might include removing an servicing operations on the equipment. energy or reaccumulation of stored isolating circuit element, blocking a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72494 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

controlling switch, opening an extra standardized according to print and observe each employee the procedure disconnecting device, or removing a format; covers. The employer may inspect a valve handle to reduce the potential for • Substantial—Lockout and tagout representative sample of the equipment any inadvertent energization. devices must be substantial enough to the procedure covers and authorized The standard requires that whenever prevent inadvertent or accidental employees who implement the major replacement, repair, renovation or removal. Locks must be substantial procedure on that equipment. modification of equipment is performed, enough to prevent removal except by Equipment that has the same type and and whenever new equipment is excessive force or by special tools such magnitude of hazardous energy and has installed, the employer must ensure that as bolt cutters or other metal cutting the same or similar type of controls may energy-isolating devices are designed to tools. The device for attaching the tag be grouped together and inspected by accept locks. In the preamble to the must be non-reusable, attachable by the type of procedure (Ex. 2–26, Letter general industry rule, OSHA explained hand, self-locking and non-releasable. It to Thomas J. Civic, 3/9/2004). Moreover, that such modifications are most must also have a minimum unlocking a grouping of detailed individual effectively and efficiently made as part strength of no less than 50 pounds and procedures would be considered a of the normal equipment replacement or have general design and basic single procedure for the purposes of renovation cycle (54 FR 36656). (The characteristics equivalent to a one-piece periodic inspection, provided all of the proposed shipyard rule makes clear that nylon cable tie that will withstand all procedures have the same or similar: environments; and • this requirement would only apply to • Intended equipment use; machines, equipment and systems the Identifiable—Locks and tags must • Procedural steps for applying shipyard employer owns (proposed clearly identify the employee who controls (i.e., shut down, isolation, § 1915.89(b)(2)(iii)). applies them. Tags must also warn blocking, and securing equipment); against hazardous conditions if the Requirements for lockout/tagout • Procedural steps for placement, machine or equipment is energized and devices (protective materials and removal and transfer of lockout/tagout must include a legend such as the hardware) (§ 1910.147(c)(5), proposed devices and responsibility for them; and following: DO NOT START; DO NOT § 1915.89(b)(5)). When attached to an • Requirements for testing to verify OPEN; DO NOT CLOSE; DO NOT energy-isolating device, both lockout the effectiveness of lockout/tagout ENERGIZE; DO NOT OPERATE. and tagout devices are tools that the Periodic inspections (§ 1910.147(c)(6), devices and other control measures (Ex. employer can use to help protect proposed § 1915.89(b)(6)). The standard 2–25 Letter to Lawrence P. Halprin, 9/ employees from hazardous energy. A requires that the employer perform 19/1995). ‘‘lockout device,’’ as defined in the periodic inspections at least annually to In 1993, prior to the Agency standard, provides protection by ensure that energy control procedures interpretations, SESAC raised similar holding the energy-isolating device in are working properly. The inspection concerns about the percentage of the safe position, thus preventing the must be able to determine four things: equipment that employers must inspect equipment from becoming energized (1) Whether the steps in the energy in order to determine whether the (§ 1910.147(b), proposed § 1915.95). The control procedures are being followed, energy control procedures are working ‘‘tagout device’’ is a prominent warning (2) whether the employees involved properly and employees understand device that provides protection by know their responsibilities under the their responsibilities under the identifying the energy-isolating device procedures, (3) whether the procedures procedures (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. as a source of potential danger. The are adequate to provide the necessary 104X, pp. 164–169). OSHA believes the tagout device indicates that the energy- protection, and (4) what changes, if any, interpretations incorporated and isolating device and the equipment are needed to correct identified discussed above address SESAC’s being controlled may not be operated deficiencies (54 FR 36673). The concerns. until the tagout device is removed. inspection must be performed by an Employee training (§ 1910.147(c)(7), Whichever device is used, the standard authorized employee, other than the proposed § 1915.89(b)(7)). The standard requires that it must be provided by the employee utilizing the energy control requires that the employer provide employer, be singularly identified, be procedures being inspected. effective initial training as well as the only device used for controlling The periodic inspection must contain retraining as necessary to ensure that hazardous energy and not be used for two components: an inspection of each employees understand the purpose and other purposes. Locks and tags must energy control procedure and a review function of the energy control program also meet the following requirements: of each employee’s responsibilities and acquire the knowledge and skills • Durable—Lockout and tagout under the energy control procedure necessary for the safe application, use devices must be able to withstand the being inspected. Where a tagout system and removal of the energy controls. The environment to which they are exposed is used, the inspector’s review of details of the training (e.g., amount and for the maximum duration of the employee responsibilities also extends type of training) may vary depending on expected exposure. Tagout devices, to affected employees because of the factors such as the employee’s job duties including tags, must be constructed and increased importance of their role in under the energy control program and printed so that they do not deteriorate avoiding accidental or inadvertent the complexity of the equipment or or become illegible in wet or damp energization (54 FR 36673). In addition, lockout/tagout procedures (54 FR environments, or when used in when a tagout system is used, the 36673). The relative degree of environments where corrosives (e.g., inspection must include a review with knowledge that authorized, affected and acid and alkali chemicals) are used or authorized and affected employees other employees must acquire also stored; about the limitations of tags. varies, with authorized employees • Standardized—Both lockout and The standard requires that each demanding the most extensive training tagout devices must be standardized energy control procedure must be because of their responsibility for according to color, shape, or size so they separately inspected. However, that implementing energy control are readily recognized and associated does not mean the employer must procedures (i.e., applying lockout and with the control of hazardous energy. inspect each piece of equipment under tagout devices) and performing Tagout devices must also be the same energy control procedure or servicing operations. For example, the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72495

training for authorized employees must that training and retraining has been (2) Check the work area to ensure that cover at least: provided and is current. all employees have been safely • Recognition of applicable Application of controls positioned or removed; hazardous energy sources; (§ 1910.147(d), proposed § 1915.89(c)). (3) Notify affected employees after • The type and magnitude of the The standard establishes procedures removing locks or tags and before energy available in the workplace; and that authorized employees must follow starting equipment; and • The means and methods necessary for applying energy controls. The energy (4) Make sure that locks and tags are for energy isolation and control. control procedures must include the removed only by the authorized Affected employees, because they following elements implemented in this employees who attached them. In the operate or use the equipment that sequence: very few instances when this is not authorized employees are servicing, (1) Prepare for shutdown, ensuring possible, the device may be removed by must be trained in the purpose and use authorized employee has knowledge in another employee who is also an of the energy control procedures. the type and magnitude of the energy, authorized employee and is working at Finally, other employees who may work the hazards to be controlled and the the direction of the employer, provided or be in an area where energy control methods to control energy; that the employer has: procedures are in use need to be (2) Shut down the equipment using • Implemented specific procedures instructed about the procedure in use the procedures established for that and training that address the situation; and, most importantly, about the equipment; and prohibition against attempting to start or (3) Isolate the equipment from the • Demonstrated that the procedures energize machines or equipment that are energy sources; provide equivalent safety. (4) Apply lockout or tagout devices to locked out or tagged out. Furthermore, the procedure must energy isolating device in a manner that As mentioned, when a tagout system include the following: is used the standard requires that holds the energy isolating devices in a • A verification that the employee employers also train employees in the safe or off (lockout) position or indicates who applied the lockout/tagout device limitations of tags, including at least: that operation or movement of the is not at the facility; • Tags are essentially warning energy isolating device is prohibited • Reasonable efforts have been made devices affixed to energy isolating (tagout). Where a tag cannot be affixed to contact the authorized employee to devices and do not provide the physical directly to the energy isolating device, inform him or her that the device has restraint of a lock; the standard requires that it must be been removed; and • When a tag is attached to an energy placed as close as safely possible to the • Assurance that the absent isolating device, it is not to be removed device, and in a position that will be authorized employee knows about the without authorization of the authorized immediately obvious to anyone removal before he or she returns and person responsible for it, and it is never attempting to operate the device or resumes work. to be bypassed, ignored or otherwise equipment; defeated; (5) Relieve or render safe all stored or Additional safety requirements • To be effective, tags must be legible residual energy. If there is a possibility (§ 1910.147(f), proposed § 1915.89(e)). and understandable by all authorized of stored or residual energy The standard includes additional employees, affected employees and all reaccumulating, the verification of requirements when certain other employees whose work operations isolation must be continued until the circumstances may pose an increased are or may be in the area; servicing is completed or the risk no risk of harm. These circumstances are: • Tags and their means of attachment longer exists; and (1) Testing or positioning equipment must be made of materials that will (6) Verify isolation and deenergization during servicing; (2) the presence of withstand the environmental conditions of equipment before beginning outside (contractor) personnel at the encountered in the workplace; servicing. worksite who are engaged in servicing • Tags may evoke a false sense of The standard requires that applying operations; (3) servicing or maintenance security. They are only one part of an energy controls be performed only by performed by a group (rather than one overall energy control program; and the authorized employee performing the specific person); and (4) changes in • Tags must be securely attached to servicing and only after affected workshifts or personnel. an energy isolating device so they employees are notified that energy Testing or positioning of machines, cannot be inadvertently or accidentally controls are being applied (or being equipment, systems or their components detached during use. removed) (§ 1910.147(c)(8) and (9), (§ 1910.147(f)(1), proposed § 1915(e)(1)). The standard also requires the proposed § 1915.89(b)(8) and (9)). The standard allows the temporary employer to provide retraining to Release from lockout or tagout removal of locks or tags and the re- authorized and affected employees (§ 1910.147(e), proposed § 1915(d)). The energization of equipment during the when the energy control procedures are standard also establishes procedures limited time when power is needed for changed, when a change in job that authorized employees must follow the testing or positioning of them or assignment occurs or when a change in when releasing lockout and tagout their components. The reenergization equipment presents a new hazard. applications. Before lockout or tagout must be conducted in accordance with Additional retraining must also be devices are removed (i.e., the equipment the sequence of steps listed below to provided when an inspection reveals or is being released from the lockout or ensure employees’ safety when they the employer has reason to believe that tagout status) and energy is restored to take equipment from a deenergized to there are deviations from or the equipment, the authorized employee energized condition and back again: inadequacies in the employee’s must take the following actions in this (1) Clear the equipment of tools and knowledge or use of the energy control sequence: materials; procedures. Finally, the retraining must (1) Inspect the work area to ensure (2) Remove employees from the reestablish employee proficiency and that non-essential items have been equipment area; describe any new or revised control removed and that equipment (3) Remove the lockout or tagout methods and procedures, if needed. The components are intact and capable of devices in accordance with the required standard requires that employers certify operating properly; removal procedures;

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72496 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

(4) Energize the equipment and • The authorized employee must energized or starts up during the proceed with testing or positioning; ascertain the exposure status of each servicing operation is a key inquiry for (5) When testing or positioning is member of the group; employers. Thus, OSHA believes • complete, deenergize all systems and Each authorized employee must preventing energization or startup isolate the equipment from the energy affix a personal lockout or tagout device during servicing that could cause injury source; and when he or she begins work and remove is necessary to fully effectuate the it when work is completed; and standard’s purpose and the provisions (6) Reapply lockout or tagout devices • If more than one crew or group is designed to protect employees from in accordance with the required control involved in servicing, an authorized injury during servicing operations. application procedures. employee must be designated to In Reich v. General Motors Corp., the Outside personnel (contractors, ship’s coordinate the affected groups and Commission and Court of Appeals for crew, etc.) (§ 1910.147(f)(2), proposed ensure continuity of protection. the Sixth Circuit did not accept OSHA’s § 1915(e)(2)). When outside personnel Shift or personnel changes interpretation of ‘‘unexpected’’ perform servicing operations at the (§ 1910.147(f)(4), proposed § 1915(e)(4)). energization or startup in the general worksite, the standard requires that the The standard requires that the industry Lockout/Tagout standard. onsite employer and the outside employer’s energy control program Reich v. General Motors Corp., 17 employer must inform each other of include specific procedures to ensure O.S.H. Cas. (BNA) 1673 (1995); 89 F.3d their respective lockout or tagout the continuity of lockout or tagout 313 (6th Cir. 1996). Although the procedures. The onsite employer must protection during the workshift or Agency disagrees with their decisions in ensure that his or her personnel personnel changes. that case, to avoid any confusion OSHA understand and comply with all Appendix A (Non-mandatory). The is not using the term ‘‘unexpected’’ in restrictions and/or prohibitions of the standard also includes a non-mandatory this proposal. OSHA believes this outside employer’s energy control appendix as a guideline to help change further clarifies the Agency’s program. The proposed rule makes it employers and employees comply with intent that the proposal covers all clear that outside personnel include the requirements of the standard. The servicing activities in which the ship’s crew and contractors hired by the appendix also provides other helpful equipment being serviced could ship owner. information on the control of hazardous energize, start up or release energy The following accident highlights the energy. while the employee is servicing it, and need for employers to coordinate their The differences between proposed such action could cause injury. lockout/tagout program. In 1987, a § 1915.89 and § 1910.147. As Systems. OSHA proposes to add the mentioned, in most respects, OSHA is fatality occurred aboard a grain-carrying word ‘‘systems’’ to the ‘‘machines and proposing to apply the general industry ship that was equipped with wing tanks equipment’’ the general industry lockout/tagout standard to shipyards in on each side of the ship. A screw standard covers. The hazards on vessels the same manner as it applies to general conveyor ran through each wing tank. often involve working on ship’s systems industry. However, in certain places At the time of the accident, two of the that create and distribute power—not OSHA is proposing to modify the wing tanks were being washed. only the machines or equipment that are language of the standard to make the Simultaneously, a Marine Chemist and driven by it. There are several reasons rule more directly applicable to a shipyard employee were inside for explicitly identifying systems in the shipyard employment. Most of the another wing tank that was not being application of the shipyard standard. proposed modifications are strictly washed. The shipyard employee was First, the language of shipbuilding and technical, for example, changes in the standing on the conveyor when it was repair revolves around systems. The effective date and references to turned on by a member of the ship’s functional components of a ship are applicable standards in Part 1915. A few crew who was unaware the employee commonly known as ship’s systems, proposed changes address specific and the chemist were inside the other such as electrical, propulsion, guidance, working conditions and circumstances wing tank. The screw conveyor crushed fuel, or radar systems. Adding systems in shipyards. the shipyard employee to death. to the standard makes it more directly • ‘‘Unexpected.’’ The proposal does applicable to shipyard employment, and Although a lockout procedure was in not include the term ‘‘unexpected,’’ effect for the employees washing the makes it clear that the standard applies which the general industry Lockout/ to systems as a whole, not merely the tanks, this information was not Tagout standard uses in describing provided to the other employees, nor individual components of such systems. equipment energization and startup that Second, including systems also makes was there any coordination between the standard covers (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(i)). it clear that pipes, electrical cables, and employers or tasks. OSHA interpreted ‘‘unexpected like components are included in the Group lockout or tagout energization or startup’’ to mean equipment and processes to which (§ 1910.147(f)(3), proposed § 1915(e)(3)). energization or startup of equipment lockout/tagout must be applied, and that The standard requires that when that is unintended or unplanned. OSHA a holistic approach may be needed to servicing is performed by a crew or believes that energization or startup that ensure employees are protected. In some other group, the employer must utilize occurs while the employee is servicing cases, pipes, power cables, and control procedures that afford employees a level the equipment and before the employee systems need to be considered when of protection equivalent to the use of a intends to activate it is unintended and working on a specific piece of personal lockout or tagout device. The unplanned. This includes any steps equipment, and adding the systems term group lockout/tagout procedures must toward reenergization that are taken helps to ensure that holistic approach is be in accord with the employer’s energy without the servicing employee’s followed. control procedures, including at least knowledge. Such startup is clearly Scope—exemptions. The shipyard the following specific requirements: outside the energy control plan and lockout/tagout proposal (§ 1915.89(a)(1)) • Each group working under a group procedures, and could result in injury if does not carry over the exemptions from lockout/tagout must have an authorized the energy involved is strong enough. coverage contained in the scope section employee who is vested with primary Thus, determining whether employees of the general industry standard responsibility for the group; could be injured if the equipment is (§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)). The reasons are

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72497

obvious. The exemptions include the Federal agency’s safety procedures or Similarly, § 1910.147(a)(3)(ii) requires maritime industry or address hazards manual does not constitute an exercise employers to use the general industry and activities that are not present in of statutory authority sufficient to justify standard to supplement lockout/tagout shipyard employment (e.g., agriculture, preemption under section 4(b)(1) of the provisions in other standards in part oil and gas well drilling and servicing). OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 653). Id. Preemption 1910. The proposed rule modifies this The proposal (§ 1915.80 and .89) makes is appropriate only where a Federal language to include part 1915 as well as clear that the entirety of subpart F agency implements and enforces the part 1910. As mentioned, the part 1915 applies to shipyard employment, regulatory apparatus necessary to standards that contain lockout/tagout including landside operations and work replace those safeguards the OSH Act requirements include § 1915.162 Ship’s on board vessels and vessel sections. requires. Id. Boilers, § 1915.163 Ship’s Piping The proposal also does not include With regard to Federal civilian Systems, § 1915.164 Ship’s Propulsion the exemption that SESAC employees, the SESAC’s proposed Machinery, and§ 1915.181 Electrical recommended: exemption also is inconsistent with the circuits and distribution boards. Part Note: This standard does not apply on OSH Act, Executive Order (E.O.) 12196 1910 standards that currently contain vessel sections, equipment, and machines and 28 CFR 1960. Those provisions, lockout/tagout related requirements that which are under the control of a Federal which require that each Federal agency may apply, with some exceptions, to government agency (e.g., the U.S. Navy), and provide safe and healthful places and shipyards include: § 1910.178 Power where the agency exercises control over conditions of employment for Federal Industrial Trucks; § 1910.179 Overhead hazardous energy sources by its lockout or employees, are meant to ensure that and Gantry Cranes; § 1910.181 Derricks; tagout procedures. Those procedures shall Federal civilian employees have the § 1910.213 Woodworking Machinery; supersede these regulations (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. 104X, p. 48). same protections as private sector § 1910.217 Mechanical Power Presses; employees have under the OSH Act (29 § 1910.218 Forging Machines; It is unclear to whom SESAC intends U.S.C. 668(a)(1); E.O. 12196 § 1–201 § 1910.252 Welding, Cutting and that the proposed exemption would (1980); 29 CFR 1960.1(a)). To effectuate Brazing; and § 1910.305 Electrical. apply—the ship, Federal civilian this, section 1–201(d) of Executive Definitions. The proposed standard employees, military personnel, shipyard Order 12196 and 29 CFR 1960.16 uses the same definitions as paragraph owners or Federal contract employers require Federal agencies to comply with (b) of § 1910.147. The proposed and employees. At the outset, OSHA all standards issued under section 6 the definitions contain some technical notes that its standards apply to OSH Act. There is no evidence in the changes, primarily to make the employers and not vessels. Assuming, record that the hazardous energy to definitions more directly applicable to however, that SESAC intends the which Federal civilian employees may shipyard employment. In addition, the exemption to apply to shipyard owners be exposed during onboard servicing lockout/tagout definitions have been and Federal contractors who perform operations is any different from those moved to the definitions section for servicing onboard government vessels, that private sector employees face subpart F, (proposed § 1915.95). As a such an exemption is inconsistent with onboard vessels. Therefore, OSHA result, the paragraph numbers in the the OSH Act and case law interpreting believes excluding Federal employees is proposed § 1915.89 do not correspond it. The OSH Act does not exclude not appropriate. with the numbers in the general Federal contractors from coverage (29 With regard to military personnel, industry standard. U.S.C. 653(b)(2)). The case law is well- OSHA notes that E.O. 12196 excludes Installing lockable energy-isolating settled that employees of private from coverage ‘‘military personnel and devices during replacement and contractors performing work under uniquely military equipment, systems, overhaul. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of the Federal contracts are covered under the and operations’’ (E.O. 12196 § 1–101). general industry standard requires OSH Act. Ensign-Bickford Co. v. Accordingly, the exemption SESAC employers to install lockable energy- OSHRC, 717 F.2d 1419, 1421, cert. recommends is not necessary to exclude isolating devices when replacing or denied, 466 U.S. 937 (1984). In addition, military personnel from the proposed overhauling machines or equipment. In the provisions in 29 CFR part 1960 lockout/tagout standard. the preamble to the final standard, (Elements for Federal Employee Scope—application and purpose. The OSHA said that it was ‘‘much more Occupational Safety and Health general industry standard specifies that effective and protective’’ to design a Programs) stress that the OSH Act it does not apply to ‘‘normal production locking capability into equipment covers Federal contractors and their operations,’’ except in certain limited during normal replacement and employees. In particular, § 1960.1(f) situations (§ 1910.147(a)(2)(ii)). The overhaul cycles (54 FR 36656). The provides that Federal contract standard and its preamble explain that proposed lockout/tagout standard for employees are assured protection under equipment hazards during those shipyards also contains this requirement the OSH Act and no provision of part operations are covered by subpart O of (proposed § 1915.89(b)(2)(iii)). However, 1960 ‘‘shall be construed in any manner Part 1910. The requirements of subpart the general industry provision assumes to relieve any private employer, O generally apply to shipyard that the employer owns, and therefore, including Federal contractors, or their employment. However, certain has the ability to make changes to employees of any rights or provisions are not applicable to equipment. This frequently is not the responsibilities under the provisions of shipyard employment because the case in shipyard employment, the Act.’’ specific requirements in subpart H of particularly with regard to ship’s OSHA is preempted from covering part 1915 apply (e.g., §§ 1915.131 and systems. As mentioned, shipyard Federal contractors and their employees .134). Accordingly, OSHA is proposing employers ordinarily do not own the only where another Federal agency has to revise the regulatory language to ships that they service. Accordingly, the statutory authority to prescribe and indicate that standards addressing Agency proposes to include the enforce occupational safety and health normal production operations in following exception to standards on the contract employers and shipyard employment are found in the § 1915.89(b)(2)(iii): ‘‘This requirement exercises that authority. Ensign- applicable requirements contained in does not apply to a machine, equipment Bickford, 717 F.2d at 1421. A ‘‘subpart O of 29 CFR part 1910 and or system that the employer does not contractual obligation to comply with a subpart H of 29 CFR part 1915.’’ own.’’

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72498 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

However, OSHA believes that hazards the contract employees will and cost savings associated with shipyard employees, ship’s crews, and encounter (69 FR 55674, (9/15/2004)). different hazardous energy approaches. contractor employees would be safer if OSHA is concerned that the language Please submit any information on vessel owners installed lockout systems, of paragraph (ii) requiring the on-site program effectiveness, injury reduction, and some owners already are employer to ensure that his/her costs, cost savings, and other benefits implementing this safety measure. For employees understand and comply with associated with your lockout/tagout example, the Military Sealift Command the restrictions and prohibitions of the efforts. (MSC) operates over 100 civilian-crewed outside employer’s energy control Compatibility of general industry ships providing ocean transportation of program may appear to run counter to approach for shipyard employment. At equipment, fuel, supplies, and the common practice of contractors the beginning of the discussion of the ammunition to sustain U.S. military following the host employer’s programs. proposed lockout/tagout standard, forces worldwide (Ex. 9). The MSC OSHA does not believe that this is OSHA outlined the reasons why the lockout/tagout program requires both a actually the case, because contract Agency proposes to adopt the general tag and a locking device with a padlock employers who adopt the host industry lockout/tagout approach for to secure an energy source whenever employer’s energy control procedures shipyard employment. OSHA requests possible, which protects shipyard would implement the required comment on the proposed approach. employees as well as ship’s crews coordination and both employers would Specifically, OSHA requests comment during lockout/tagout applications (Ex. be in compliance. However, to avoid on whether the proposed approach, as 9). OSHA asks for comment on how the potential confusion on this matter, is, would adequately protect employees Agency or shipyards can encourage ship OSHA is considering alternative against hazardous energy in shipyard owners to install lockable systems language used in a similar requirement employment. Please explain what during the design and overhaul process. found in § 1910.269(d)(8)(iv) of the additional modifications to the Finally, the Agency is also proposing to general industry electric power standard, if any, may be needed to change paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to reference generation, transmission and protect shipyard employees from the effective date of the revised 1915 distribution standard, which reads as hazardous energy. OSHA is aware that subpart F. follows: a number of shipyard employers have implemented lockout/tagout programs Outside personnel (contractors, ship’s Whenever outside servicing personnel are to be engaged in activities covered by that are based on the general industry crew, etc.) proposed § 1915.89(e)(2)). standard. Please describe your lockout/ OSHA is requesting comment on what paragraph (d) of this section, the on-site employer and the outside employer shall tagout program and submit a copy of it language to adopt in the final rule that inform each other of their respective lockout for the record. Why did your best and most clearly explains the or tagout procedures, and each employer establishment implement the general requirement to coordinate the activities shall ensure that his or her personnel industry approach? What type of of the various employers that might be understand and comply with restrictions and revisions, if any, did you make to the involved in servicing operations at prohibitions of the energy control procedures general industry energy control program being used. shipyards. The proposed language, so it would be compatible and effective which is consistent with the language of OSHA requests comment on the best in your workplace? § 1910.147(f)(2) reads as follows: language to use for this provision. Is the Some members of SESAC urged that (2) Outside personnel (contractors, ship’s alternative language easier to OSHA, instead of proposing to apply the crew, etc.). (i) Whenever outside servicing understand? Does it improve or alter general industry lockout/tagout personnel such as contractors or ship’s crew employee protections? Does it provide standard to shipyards, to develop a are to be engaged in activities covered by the more flexibility by allowing the different plain language lockout/tagout scope and application of this standard, the employers to decide among themselves standard tailored specifically to on-site employer and the outside employer which procedures are more appropriate? shipyard employment. OSHA requests shall inform each other of their respective Should the final standard require the comment on whether a different lockout or tagout procedures. employer to adopt the most protective (ii) The on-site employer shall ensure that standard, not based on the general his/her employees understand and comply procedures, regardless of which industry standard, is necessary to with the restrictions and prohibitions of the employer has them? control hazardous energy in shipyard outside employer’s energy control program. Issues for which OSHA is seeking employment. If not, why not? If so, what comment on the lockout/tagout should such a standard contain? What Several shipyard employment proposal. Although OSHA is proposing types of problems and costs, if any, standards require employers to to adopt the § 1910.147 provisions with would adopting a separate shipyard coordinate safety and health activities. minor revision, the Agency is also lockout/tagout standard pose for For example, the part 1915 Subpart P considering whether to add additional shipyard employers who already have Fire Protection in Shipyard measures to further tailor the standard implemented a lockout/tagout program Employment standards require contract to the shipyard industry and to provide based on the general industry standard? employers in shipyard employment to additional protection for shipyard Incident investigation. SESAC have a fire safety plan that complies employees. Therefore, OSHA asks for recommended that a shipyard lockout/ with the host employers fire safety plan comment on the following issues. tagout standard include a provision (§ 1915.502(e)). In OSHA’s experience, Current shipyard lockout/tagout requiring the employer to conduct such coordination is commonly programs. OSHA asks for information incident investigations when accidents achieved by the contract employers on current hazardous energy control or near misses occur (Docket SESAC adopting the safety and health policies programs used by shipyard employers 1993–3, Ex. 8, p. 7). They recommended and procedures of the shipyard. For and how they differ from OSHA’s that incident investigations be example, as explained in the preamble general industry approach. Please conducted to identify deficiencies in the to the fire protection rulemaking, OSHA describe your lockout/tagout program lockout/tagout program and then to finds it acceptable for a contractor to and submit copies of your programs to correct any problems or deficiencies in adopt the host employer’s fire safety the record. OSHA is also interested in the program. OSHA requests input on plan if that plan includes the fire learning about the effectiveness, costs, whether the standard should include an

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72499

incident investigation requirement. to allow locks and shipyard employers employees are servicing the same Does your shipyard or industry cannot attach or retrofit them because equipment (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. routinely conduct such investigations? they do not own the vessel. In 104X, pp. 134–158). OSHA requests If not, why not? If so, has the approach recognition of this, OSHA is proposing comment on other ‘‘equivalent been successful in identifying and to exempt shipyard employers from the methods’’ for group lockout/tagout that resolving lockout/tagout problems? If requirement to make systems on vessels the Agency should consider. What OSHA adopts an incident investigation lockable during replacement and repair methods does your shipyard or industry provision, what requirements should it if the employer does not own the vessel. use to control access in group lockout/ include (e.g., the qualifications of staff Therefore, for machines, equipment and tagout situations? Do they result in any performing the investigation; the systems onboard vessels, it is unlikely other advantages or disadvantages? promptness of the investigation; the that the number of non-lockable systems It is OSHA’s view that the group quality of the investigation, will decrease significantly without lockout/tagout provisions apply documentation, and corrective action)? action by ship owners. At the same whether the employees in the group Additional measures. As discussed, time, OSHA is aware that many work for only one employer, or if they the general industry standard only shipyard employers use additional work for multiple employers. In your allows an employer to use a tagout measures whenever a tagout system is establishment or industry, are group device on a lockable energy isolating used, regardless of whether the energy lockout/tagout procedures used for device when the employer can isolating device is capable of being multi-employer groups? If so, what demonstrate that the tagout system will locked (Docket SESAC 1993–3, Ex. safety measures do you use to assure provide ‘‘full employee protection,’’ that 104X, p. 73). OSHA requests comment that consistent procedures are used by is, when the employer demonstrates that on whether the standard should require the employers and employees involved? the tagout program provides a level of shipyard employers to implement Non-mandatory appendix. OSHA safety equivalent to that obtained by additional safety measures whenever a proposes to adopt the non-mandatory using a lock. To demonstrate that the tagout system is used, regardless of appendix from the general industry required level of protection is achieved whether the energy isolating device is standard. The appendix, which provides the employer must demonstrate full capable of being locked. Does your an example of a typical minimum compliance with all tagout provisions establishment currently use additional lockout procedure, will help shipyard and implement additional safety safety measures whenever a tagout employers comply with the standard. measures as necessary. Some of the system is utilized? If not, why not? If so, OSHA requests comment on whether additional measures the standard what measures do you use and why? the appendix should be revised to identifies are removal of isolating circuit A related issue is what additional further tailor it to shipyard employers. elements or valve handles and blocking measures employers may use when Section 1915.90 Safety Color Code for control switches. tagout systems are utilized. In addition Marking Physical Hazards The general industry standard and to using the measures identified in the this proposed rule do not apply the general industry standard, some OSHA proposes to incorporate by requirement of full employee protection shipyard employers use administrative reference the general industry standard and additional measures to energy means, such as posting authorized on safety color coding for marking isolating devices that are not capable of employees as attendants at the energy physical hazards (§ 1910.144). The being locked. OSHA decided against isolating device or power source to help standard already is applicable to extending the requirement to non- ensure that no one removes the tagout shipyard employment, both on vessels lockable energy isolating devices in the device or starts up the equipment while and on shore. The existing standard general industry rule because the servicing is still in progress. OSHA requires that the color red shall be the Agency determined that such devices requests comment on whether the basic color for the identification of could not provide protection equivalent Agency should include posting of an dangerous conditions such as containers to that obtained by using a lock. In attendant as an example of the of flammable liquids, lights at addition, OSHA observed that, in additional measures employers may use. barricades and temporary obstructions general industry, the number of non- What additional measures does your and danger signs. The standard also lockable energy isolating devices was shipyard and industry use to provide specifies that red shall be the color for small, less than 10 percent of all added protection when tagout systems emergency stop buttons, electric equipment. Moreover, OSHA predicted are used? Please explain how these switches, and machine stop bars. In that their number would rapidly decline measures work and why they are used. addition, the standard requires that and eventually disappear when the Group lockout/tagout. The general yellow shall be the basic color for requirement to make energy isolating industry standard designating caution and marking devices lockable during replacement or (§ 1910.147(f)(3)(iii)(D)) and the physical hazards such as slip, trip and major repair was implemented. proposed standard require that the fall hazards. Although the situation for shipyard employer ensure that each authorized landside operations is similar to that of employee affix a personal lockout or Section 1915.91 Accident Prevention general industry, the situation onboard tagout device to the group mechanism Signs and Tags vessels is almost the opposite. OSHA before beginning work and remove the OSHA is proposing to incorporate by estimates that more than 90 percent of device when work ends. This provision, reference the general industry Accident equipment and systems onboard vessels along with others in the standard, Prevention Signs and Tags standard are not capable of being locked (see ensures that each employee has a degree (1910.145). The standard’s requirements Preliminary Economic Analysis below). of control over his or her protection. on the classification, design and Some cannot be locked because the SESAC recommended that a shipyard wording of accident prevention signs system is too complex or because lockout/tagout standard include a apply to shipyard employment (on locking the system would result in provision allowing shipyard employers vessels and on shore)(§ 1910.145(a) shutting down all operations throughout to use administrative or other means to through (e)); however, the standard’s the vessel. In addition, a number of control access to locked or tagged requirements on accident prevention vessel systems are not designed or built machines or equipment when a group of tags do not (§ 1910.145(f)(ii)). Part 1915

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72500 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

does not have comprehensive, uniform and that employees be provided with over an 11-year period (1993–2003), 27 requirements on the design, application information as to their meaning shipyard employees were killed in and use of such tags. Part 1915 contains (existing paragraph 1910.145(f)(5)(v)) as transportation accidents, accounting for only limited requirements for accident already required for accident prevention 17 percent of the deaths during that signs and labels, such as provisions on tags? (Section 1915.16 contains similar time. OSHA believes that the proposed the posting of warning signs and labels requirements, but they are for warning motor vehicle safety provisions will to comply with the shipyard confined signs and labels for confined and help reduce the incidence of motor and enclosed spaces standard enclosed spaces.) If not, why not? If so, vehicle related fatalities. (§ 1915.16). what should those requirements In § 1915.95, OSHA is proposing to The general industry provisions on include? define ‘‘motor vehicle’’ to mean any accident prevention tags require that motor-driven vehicle operated by an they be used where employees are Section 1915.92 Retention of DOT employee that is used to transport exposed to potentially hazardous Markings, Placards, and Labels employees, materials, or property. conditions, equipment or operations OSHA proposes to retain, with minor Motor vehicles would include passenger that are ‘‘out of the ordinary, editorial changes, the existing cars, light trucks (e.g., pickup trucks), unexpected or not readily apparent’’ requirements (§ 1915.100) on the vans, all-terrain vehicles, powered (§ 1910.145(f)(3)). The provisions also retention of DOT markings, placards industrial trucks, and other similar require that tags meet uniform criteria and labels on hazardous materials the vehicles. for message, legibility, positioning/ shipyard receives. Proposed paragraphs OSHA believes the proposed affixing, and comprehensibility (a) and (b) require that employers not requirements are necessary because (§ 1910.145(f)(4)). remove labels and markings on any vehicle accidents continue to result in Incorporating the general industry hazardous materials or freight employee deaths in shipyard standard is necessary to provide containers, rail freight cars, motor employment. As discussed above, a high consistent protection wherever shipyard vehicles, or transportation vehicles that proportion of shipyard employee employees are exposed to potentially the U.S. Department of Transportation fatalities are caused by motor vehicle- hazardous conditions. It also ensures regulations require to be marked until related accidents. Motor vehicle that important warning and danger signs the hazardous materials are removed, accidents are also a significant cause of and tags are uniform in their design and and that any residue is cleaned and any employee injury in shipyards. use, which OSHA believes will increase vapors are purged to prevent potential According to BLS, since 1998 an their effectiveness. The proposed hazards. This would apply regardless of estimated 225 shipyard employees have requirements should not pose problems how the shipyard receives the suffered motor vehicle-related injuries for shipyard employers since the general hazardous material packages (e.g., single serious enough to involve days away industry requirements are universally packages, in bulk). from work. In 2002, 63 shipyard recognized and the use of signs and tags Proposed paragraph (c) requires that employees suffered injuries involving as specified in § 1910.145 are already the markings, placards and labels on the days away from work in transportation common shipyard practice. hazardous materials be maintained so accidents. To eliminate any possible confusion, that they are ‘‘readily visible.’’ Proposed Paragraph (a)—Application. In the proposal also amends § 1910.145 to paragraph (d) states that employers are paragraph (a)(1), OSHA proposes to remove from the scope provisions the considered in compliance with this apply this section to any motor vehicle exclusions for ‘‘marine regulations’’ and section if the markings/labels on non- used to transport employees, materials ‘‘maritime’’ (§ 1910.145(a)(1) and bulk packages that will not be reshipped or property at shipyards. The provision (f)(1)(ii)). As discussed in the proposed are affixed in accordance with the also makes clear that the section would lockout/tagout section, a potential for Hazard Communication standard not apply to motor vehicle operation on confusion may exist because the terms § 1915.1200. Finally, proposed public streets and highways. OSHA ‘‘maritime’’ and ‘‘marine’’ have paragraph (e) specifies that the believes that Federal, State and local sometimes been used as shorthand for definition of ‘‘hazardous materials’’ and laws and regulations such as safety belt shipyard employment, marine terminals other undefined terms have the same and vehicle inspection laws, already and longshoring. Removing those terms definition as the U.S. Department of provide adequate protection on public eliminates that potential ambiguity. Transportation Hazardous Materials roads. Thus, the proposal is directed to (OSHA notes that removing the terms Regulations (49 CFR parts 171 through where those laws and regulations may does not change the scope and 180). OSHA requests comment on not apply to motor vehicles used on application of § 1910.145 vis a vis whether paragraph (e), which cross- shipyard property (e.g., transporting marine terminals and longshoring; that references the DOT hazardous materials employees between worksites, moving is, removing the language excluding regulations (as does the general industry materials). Nonetheless, OSHA believes maritime and marine regulations does standard), is necessary for employers to the proposal’s benefits will extend not now make the standard applicable understand the standard or whether it beyond motor vehicle operation at to marine terminals and longshoring. should be deleted in the final rule. shipyard worksites. For example, an General industry standards apply to employee who is required to wear a marine terminals and longshoring only Section 1915.93 Motor Vehicle Safety safety belt while riding in a motor to the extent they are specifically Equipment, Operation, and vehicle on shipyard property is more incorporated by reference in parts 1917 Maintenance likely to continue to wear it when the and 1918. Section 1910.145 is not OSHA proposes to add a new section vehicle leaves the shipyard. Likewise, a incorporated into either part; therefore, addressing the hazards associated with motor vehicle that is maintained in safe it does not apply.) the use of motor vehicles at shipyards. operating condition for use in shipyard OSHA requests comment on the The proposed section sets forth employment will also be safe when it is proposed requirements. Should OSHA requirements addressing motor vehicle used on public roads. propose that accident prevention signs safety equipment and the safe operation In paragraph (a)(2), OSHA proposes to be understandable to employees and maintenance of motor vehicles. limit application of most of the (existing paragraph 1910.145(f)(4)(iv)) According to the BLS CFOI database, provisions of the section to motor

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72501

vehicles the employer provides. 18). There have been injuries and consider the safety of employees However, because some employers fatalities in shipyard employment, as whenever they acquire motor vehicles. allow employees to use their own motor well as other industries, directly related The proposal includes an exception to vehicles to transport themselves, other to employees not using safety belts, the safety belt requirement for those employees and materials within the including while operating powered motor vehicles that were not originally shipyard, OSHA proposes that three industrial trucks (e.g., forklifts) and manufactured with them (e.g., buses). provisions in this section also would other off-road vehicles (Ex. 2–9). However, if the motor vehicle was apply to motor vehicles provided by Recognition of the hazard of operating manufactured with safety belts and they employees. Those provisions are the motor vehicles without safety belts is have been removed or are not requirements that employees use safety also evidenced by the national operational, the employer would have to belts (§ 1915.93(b)(2)), that motor consensus standards that require motor ensure the motor vehicle has vehicles have seats for each employee vehicles to be equipped with operator operational safety belts before it is used being transported (§ 1915.93(b)(4)), and restraints and specify that operators and for the first time in the shipyard. that tools and materials transported by passengers use them (Ex. 3–13, SAE Proposed paragraph (b)(2) requires the motor vehicles be firmly secured J386, Operator Restraint Systems for Off- employer to ensure that employees use (§ 1915.93(c)(2)). Road Work Machines, November 1997; safety belts at all times while operating Proposed paragraph (a)(3) states that Ex. 3–10, ANSI/ASME B56.1–2000 or riding in a motor vehicle. As only motor vehicle safety equipment Safety Standard for Low Lift and High mentioned, motor vehicle accidents are requirements in paragraph (b)(1) Lift Trucks). The proposal would make a significant cause of employee injury through (b)(3) would apply to the subpart F consistent with those and death and safety belts have been operation of powered industrial trucks standards. shown to reduce that risk. OSHA notes in shipyards. The seating requirements OSHA is aware that the powered that the proposed requirement applies in paragraph (b)(4) would not apply to industrial truck standard (§ 1910.178) to all motor vehicles used at shipyards powered industrial trucks manufactured does not require those motor vehicles to including powered industrial trucks. for operation in a standing position, be equipped with safety belts. Much of Forklifts are particularly susceptible to because they are not equipped with the standard was promulgated pursuant tipovers if they run over uneven ground, seats. In addition, the Power Industrial to section 6(a) and was taken from the potholes, sand, or railways; turn corners Trucks standard prohibits unauthorized ANSI standard on low lift and high lift sharply; or if the mast strikes an object. personnel from riding on powered trucks that was in effect at the time, These situations and conditions are industrial trucks and requires that a safe ANSI B56.1–1969. The 1969 ANSI often found in shipyards. In many place to ride be provided where riding standard did not have a safety belt forklift tipover accidents, operators have is allowed (§ 1910.178(m)(3)). requirement. However, when the ANSI been injured or killed because they were Proposed paragraph (a)(3) also standard was revised in 1993, thrown from the forklift, or struck or provides that the motor vehicle provisions were added requiring that crushed by the forklift when they tried operation and maintenance powered industrial trucks manufactured to jump free. In 2001, BLS reported that requirements in this section would not after 1992 be equipped with safety belts across private industry 35 of 123 forklift apply to powered industrial trucks. and requiring that operators use them. fatalities (28 percent) involved tipovers Proposed paragraph (a)(3) makes clear The current ANSI/ASME standard or falling from a moving forklift. In that employers must continue to comply continues to require this. In issuing its contrast, where forklift operators were with the maintenance, inspection, 5(a)(1) enforcement policy regarding wearing safety belts in many cases the operation, and training requirements for operator restraint systems for powered injuries were more limited. In one powered industrial trucks in § 1910.178. industrial trucks, OSHA said that the tipping accident, where an OSHA Those requirements are more provisions in the revised national inspector noted that the operator was comprehensive and provide more consensus standard evidence wearing a safety belt, the injuries were specific protection than the more ‘‘recognition of the hazard of powered limited to four fingers on one hand. general motor vehicle operation and industrial truck tipover and the need for OSHA is aware of concerns that some maintenance requirements proposed the use of an operator restraint system’’ forklift operators have about using here. (Ex. 2–15, Memorandum dated October operator restraints near water. The Paragraph (b)—Motor vehicle safety 9, 1996, to Regional Administrators Agency has heard some operators say equipment—Paragraph (b) proposes from John Miles). they do not wear safety belts because requirements for equipping motor Proposed paragraph (b)(1) would not they need to be able to jump free of the vehicles with safety equipment and require employers to retrofit those motor forklift if it goes off the dock. However, using it while motor vehicles are vehicles that they are already using with OSHA is not aware of any reports of operated. safety belts. OSHA is proposing to limit powered industrial trucks running off a OSHA proposes in paragraph (b)(1) to application of the requirement to motor shipyard dock. OSHA requests require that each motor vehicle the vehicles put into service by the comment, especially any data and other employer acquires or puts in service for employer for the first time after the final information on this issue. the first time after the final rule becomes rule becomes effective. Although OSHA OSHA is also aware of arguments that effective be equipped with safety belts anticipates that the vast majority of the safety belt provision is unnecessary for each employee operating or riding in motor vehicles shipyard employers put since states have mandatory seat belt the vehicle. The Agency believes this into service after the effective date will laws. However, those laws only apply to requirement is necessary and be new vehicles that have been motor vehicles operated on public appropriate because, as mentioned manufactured with safety belts, the streets and highways and do not apply above, shipyard employees have been proposed language also addresses used to off-road industrial vehicles such as injured and killed in motor vehicle- motor vehicles employers acquire and powered industrial trucks. As related accidents, and it is well use for the first time after the final rule mentioned, shipyard employees have documented that safety belts reduce the becomes effective. Applying the been injured and killed in off-road risk of injury and death (Exs. 2–2; 2–4, standard to both groups of motor motor vehicle accidents, which may p. 61: 2–5, p. 6; 2–6; 2–7; 2–8; 2–11; 2– vehicles would ensure that employers have been prevented if they had been

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72502 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

using safety belts. OSHA believes that which is the speed limit in most shipyard employment until the problem where employers inform employees shipyards. or damage is repaired. about the safety belt requirement and To address this hazard, it is OSHA’s Proposed paragraph (c)(2) would require their use that safety belt usage intent that employees have a safe seat to require that tools or equipment be will be significantly higher. sit in when they are transported in secured while being transported to Proposed paragraph (b)(2) also shipyards, and that they use those seats prevent unsafe movement. This will requires that the employer ensure that to ride from one location to another. reduce the risk of injury due to heavy employees wear safety belts securely OSHA is not requiring that employers or sharp tools or equipment sliding into and tightly at all times they are retrofit their motor vehicles with seats. or hitting operators or passengers. This operating or riding in a motor vehicle. Rather, employers need to ensure that provision does not require that all OSHA believes this language is transportation used to move employees materials be secured, only those that necessary because the safety belt or throughout the shipyard has seats for may pose a hazard to employees. Items operator restraint system may not every employee transported. OSHA that do not pose a hazard to the driver restrain the employee within the vehicle believes the provision should not pose or passengers could be transported in compartment in the event of an accident a problem for employers since many the vehicle cab or back of a pickup truck or tipover if the belt is not fastened shipyard employers already use vans, without being secured. As mentioned, tightly. small buses, and automobiles to this requirement would also apply to As mentioned above, the safety belt transport employees. employee provided motor vehicles used requirement would apply to both As mentioned, OSHA also proposes to at shipyards. employer and employee provided motor apply this provision to employee In paragraph (c)(3), OSHA proposes to vehicles used to transport employees, provided motor vehicles. This will address motor vehicle problems materials and equipment on shipyard ensure that every vehicle transporting associated with the intermingling of property. The risk of injury exists employees in shipyards provides the pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle regardless of whether employees are same protection. OSHA notes that this traffic in shipyards. When pedestrians, operating or riding in employer or provision would not apply to powered bicyclists and motor vehicles share employee provided motor vehicles. industrial trucks manufactured for shipyard roadways there is potential for Applying the proposed provision to operation in a standing position and do accidents. Often accidents occur employee provided motor vehicles will not have operator seats. because the motor vehicle operator does ensure that employees riding in those The Agency seeks comments on this not see the pedestrian or bicyclist in vehicles will have the same protections proposed requirement. In your time to avoid hitting them. Due to the as those riding in employer provided establishment and industry, how are size of many shipyards, roads may be motor vehicles. employees transported from one narrow or unmarked, and parking space Proposed paragraph (b)(3) would worksite to another and what measures may be limited. As a result, many require that employers ensure that are in place to ensure that they are employers provide bicycles or allow motor vehicle safety equipment is not safely transported? employees to use their own to get from removed from employer provided Paragraph (c) Motor vehicle one location to another. As the use of vehicles and replace equipment that is maintenance and operation—Paragraph bicycles has grown, so too have the removed. For purposes of this (c) proposes new requirements for the reports of accidents. For example, an paragraph, motor vehicle safety maintenance and operation of motor employee riding a bicycle to perform equipment includes items such as safety vehicles used in shipyards. regularly assigned work tasks in a belts, airbags, lights, brakes, mirrors, Proposed paragraph (c)(1) requires Mississippi shipyard was killed when horns, windshields and windshield that employers ensure that each vehicle he collided with a motor vehicle (Ex. 2– wipers. This provision must be read in is maintained in a ‘‘serviceable and safe 1). It is OSHA’s intention to ensure that conjunction with proposed paragraph operating condition.’’ Safe operating employees riding bicycles and walking (c)(1) requiring that employers equip condition refers to the condition of can be seen by motor vehicle operators motor vehicles with safety equipment equipment that directly affects the safe and protected from injury. that is in serviceable and safe operating operation of the vehicle. For example, Paragraph (c)(3) would require that condition. the proposal would require that motor employers implement measures to Proposed paragraph (b)(4) requires vehicle safety equipment such as ensure motor vehicle operators can see that motor vehicles used to transport visibility and warning devices, and avoid hitting pedestrians and employees have a firmly secured seat for headlights, taillights, horns, windshield bicyclist traveling in shipyards. The each employee being transported. It also wipers, defogging or defrosting devices proposal identifies some measures requires the employer to ensure that and safety belts be in safe working employers may implement. For employees use the seat when they are order. In § 1915.95, OSHA proposes to example, the employer may establish being transported. This requirement is define ‘‘serviceable condition’’ to mean dedicated travel lanes for pedestrians necessary because some shipyards the state or ability of a vehicle to operate and bicyclists and install crosswalks transport employees from one worksite as it was intended by the manufacturer and traffic control devices (e.g., stop to another in the back of pickup trucks to operate. Accordingly, motor vehicles signs, pavement markings) to control that do not have seats, and these that are operated in accordance with pedestrian and bicycle traffic across employees are at risk of injury from manufacturer’s instructions and roadways. Using physical barriers to falling out of or being thrown from the recommendations would be considered separate the travel lanes will also help vehicle when traveling in the back of in compliance with this provision. to prevent injury. For travel lanes to be pickup trucks, even at low speeds. In Proposed paragraph (c)(1) would also effective, the employer must ensure that 2001, for instance, a construction require that motor vehicles be removed the dedicated lanes are wide enough. employee riding in the back of a pick- from service if they are not in For example, motor vehicle lanes need up while placing cones on a highway serviceable and safe operating to be wide enough so they do not fell out and was killed even though the condition. It is OSHA’s intent that the interfere with pedestrian/bicycle lanes truck was traveling only 10 to 15 mph, motor vehicle could not be used for and pedestrian/bicycle lanes need to be

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72503

wide enough for safe passage of both and (g)). The Agency believes that definition excludes boats and vehicles pedestrian and bicyclists. applying the general industry standard operated exclusively on a rail(s). The employer may also comply with to shipyard employment should not Portable toilet facility is proposed to the proposed provision by providing pose a problem for employers because mean a non-sewered facility in which pedestrians and bicyclists with many shipyards that service the tires of urine and defecation is collected and equipment such as reflective vests, their own vehicles are aware of and contained. Portable toilet facilities may reflectors or lights. OSHA believes this adhere to the safety provisions of be flushable, with water or another measure should not pose problems for § 1910.177. flushing agent. They also may be non- employers since bicycles are OSHA requests comment on the flushable, such as facilities that use manufactured with reflectors and lights. proposed provision. To what extent do chemicals or biological agents to treat In addition, many shipyard employers shipyards service multi-piece and single waste. The proposed definition does not already provide reflective vests so piece rim wheels? What safety include privies, which are unlikely to be employees are visible to equipment precautions are followed to ensure found in shipyards because many State operators. employees are not injured during these and local regulations prohibit them near The Agency seeks comment on the tasks? shorelines. proposed provisions to reduce injuries Potable water is proposed to mean related to the intermingling of Section 1915.95 Definitions water (1) approved for drinking by the pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle In § 1915.95, OSHA proposes to add State or local authority having traffic in shipyards. OSHA also requests definitions for terms used in subpart F. jurisdiction, or (2) meeting the quality comments on the safe operation of The Agency believes that defining key standards prescribed by the U.S. motor vehicles. What does your terms in the regulatory text will make Environmental Protection Agency’s company do to ensure that employees the standards easier to understand and National Primary Water Regulations (40 operate motor vehicles safely? Do you to comply with. OSHA is not including CFR part 141). Requiring that drinking have requirements for employees a discussion of the terms that apply to water meet those requirements ensures driving in your facilities or using the control of hazardous energy that it will be free of environmental company vehicles? (lockout/tagout) in proposed § 1915.89. contaminants and toxic materials. Most of those terms are discussed The proposed definition, for purposes Section 1915.94 Servicing Multi-Piece throughout the preamble section for of subpart F, updates the existing and Single Piece Rim Wheels § 1915.89 above. The terms are affected definition in § 1910.141(a)(2) to reflect OSHA proposes to incorporate by employee, authorized employee, that the EPA regulations have replaced reference the general industry standard capable of being locked out, energized, the U.S. Public Health Service Drinking (§ 1910.177) and non-mandatory energy isolating device, energy source, Water Standards. SESAC recommended appendices on servicing multi-piece and hot tap, lockout, lockout device, normal that OSHA delete the reference to single piece rim wheels. The general production operations, servicing and/or Federal drinking water regulations as a industry standard currently exempts maintenance, setting up, and ship’s way to simplify the definition. However, shipyard employment (§ 1910.177(a)(2)). systems. OSHA believes that the reference needs (To avoid any confusion, OSHA also Hazardous or toxic substances. OSHA to be retained to ensure that employee proposes to amend § 1910.177 to delete proposes to define hazardous or toxic drinking water at least meets a uniform the exemption as it applies to shipyard substances to include any of the national quality baseline and that there employment.) following: any material listed in the U.S. will not be a gap in protection in areas OSHA decided that this gap in DOT Hazardous Materials Regulations where there may not be State or local coverage should be remedied by (49 CFR part 172), any substance drinking water regulations or applying the general industry standard regulated by subpart Z of 29 CFR part jurisdiction. OSHA requests comment to shipyard employment after a 1910, any atmosphere with an oxygen on whether the reference to Federal preventable fatality was reported in content of less than 19.5%, or any drinking water regulations should be 1999 at a special trade contractor site corrosive substance or environmental retained. during rim servicing. contaminant that may expose employees Sanitation facilities is proposed to The general industry standard applies to injury, illness or disease. Harmful mean facilities provided for employee to servicing large vehicles such as environmental contaminants would health and personal needs such as trucks, tractors, trailers, buses and off- include coliform and fecal matter. potable drinking water, toilet facilities, road machines, all of which are used in Health care professional is proposed handwashing and drying facilities, shipyard employment. The standard to mean a physician or any other health showers (including quick drench/flush), does not apply to servicing rim wheels care provider whose legally permitted changing rooms, eating and food on automobiles or on pickup trucks and scope of practice allows the provider to preparation areas, first aid stations, on- vans using ‘‘LT’’ (light trucks) tires independently provide or be delegated site medical service areas and waste (1910.177(a)(1)). the responsibility to provide some or all disposal. The proposed definition also The standard establishes requirements of the advice or consultation this includes supplies for sanitation addressing four major areas: (1) Training subpart requires. (See § 1915.87(b) for facilities such as soap, toilet paper, for all tire servicing employees further discussion.) towels, and drinking cups. OSHA notes (§ 1910.177(c)); (2) the use of proper Motor vehicle is proposed to mean that the proposed rule does not require equipment such as clip-on chucks, any motor-driven vehicle operated by an employers to provide certain sanitation restraining devices, or barriers to retain employee that is used to transport facilities such as on-site eating and the wheel components in the event of an employees, passengers, or property. For drinking areas. However, where such incident during the inflation of tires the purposes of this subpart, motor facilities are provided they would have (§ 1910.177(d)); (3) the use of vehicles would include, but are not to meet the sanitation requirements compatible components (§ 1910.177(e)); limited to, passenger cars, light trucks, OSHA proposes. and (4) the use of safe operating vans, motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, Serviceable condition means the state procedures for servicing multi-piece and powered industrial trucks, and other or ability of a tool, machine, vehicle, or single-piece rim wheels (§ 1910.177(f) similar types of vehicles. The proposed other device to operate as it was

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72504 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

intended by the manufacturer to work clothing (i.e., protective clothing) OSHA asks for comment on the extent operate. For tools, machines and before it is worn again. Information from to which youth employees are employed vehicles to be considered in serviceable site visits and industry meetings in the shipyard industries, what condition, they must be maintained in indicates that the provision may not be occupations they work in, data on work- good working condition. OSHA notes necessary because shipyards almost related injuries and illnesses occurring that if these devices are maintained and exclusively provide disposable to youth employees, and whether the operated in accordance with protective clothing. OSHA requests § 1915.97(e) prohibition is needed to manufacturer instructions and comments or information about whether protect youth employees. recommendations they would be this provision is still needed in the V. Executive Summary of the considered to be in compliance with the shipyard industry. Preliminary Economic and Initial requirement to be in serviceable Section 1910.141(h)—OSHA is Regulatory Flexibility Screening condition. proposing not to retain the existing Sewered toilet facility means a fixture requirements addressing food handling. Analysis maintained for the purpose of urination OSHA believes that existing State and Introduction. OSHA’s Preliminary and defecation that is connected to a local health codes provide adequate Economic and Regulatory Flexibility sewer, septic tank, holding tank (bilge), protection for the hazards this section is Screening Analysis (PEA) addresses or on-site sewage disposal treatment intended to address. OSHA requests issues related to the costs, benefits, facility and that is flushed with water. comment. technological feasibility, and economic For purposes of this subpart, toilet Section 1915.97(a)—OSHA is feasibility (including small business facilities that are a permanent fixture proposing not to retain the existing impacts) of the Agency’s proposed onboard a vessel or vessel section would requirement on controls and personal revision of 29 CFR 1915 subpart F on be considered to be sewered toilet protective equipment (PPE). This General Working Conditions in facilities. provision was adopted 30 years ago, Shipyard Employment. This analysis Vehicle safety equipment is proposed prior to promulgation of standards also evaluates the non-regulatory to mean those systems and devices addressing specific hazards and the PPE alternatives to the proposal. installed on a motor vehicle for the requirements in subpart I of part 1915. OSHA has determined that this purposes of effecting the safe operation Those standards identify and require the proposal is not an economically of the vehicle such as safety belts, controls and PPE this section addresses. significant regulatory action under E.O. airbags, headlights, tail lights, Section 1915.97(e)—OSHA is 12866 and not a major rule under the emergency hazard lights, windshield proposing to delete the existing Congressional Review provisions of the wipers, brakes, horn, mirrors, prohibition that minors under 18 years Small Business Regulatory Enforcement windshields and other windows, and of age not be employed in shipbreaking Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 609). As locks. or related equipment. The prohibition is required by section 6(a)(3)(C) of E.O. Vermin is proposed to mean any the only OSHA rule that regulates the 12866, OSHA has provided OMB’s insects, birds, and other animals, such working activities allowed for youth Office of Information and Regulatory as rodents and feral cats, which may employees. States have numerous rules Affairs with an assessment of the costs, create safety and health hazards for regulating work conditions for youth benefits, and alternatives of this employees. employees. At the Federal level, proposal, which are summarized below. Walking and working surfaces is OSHA’s sister agency in the Department E.O. 12866 requires regulatory agencies proposed to mean any surface on or of Labor, the Employment Standards to conduct an economic analysis for through which employees gain access to Administration regulates youth working rules that meet certain criteria. The most or perform job tasks. Walking and conditions under the authority of the frequently used criterion under E.O. working surfaces also include any Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). To 12866 is that the rule will impose surface upon or through which protect young employees from annual costs on the economy of $100 employees are required or allowed to hazardous employment, the FLSA million or more. Neither the benefits nor walk or work in the workplace. Walking provides for a minimum age of 18 years the costs of this proposed rule exceed and working surfaces include, but are in occupations found and declared by $100 million. not limited to, work areas, accessways, the Secretary to be particularly The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 aisles, exits, gangways, ladders, hazardous or detrimental to the health (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended passageways, stairs, steps, ramps, and or well-being of minors 16 and 17 years in 1996, requires OSHA to determine walkways. This definition is drawn of age. The Secretary has issued 17 whether the Agency’s regulatory actions from the proposed rule for walking and orders, published at 29 CFR part 570 will have a significant impact on a working surfaces, subpart D of part 1910 subpart E, listing the occupations where substantial number of small entities. (55 FR 13360 (04/10/1990)). OSHA persons less than 18 years of age are OSHA’s Regulatory Flexibility Analysis believes that using this term in place of prohibited from working. Order 15 of indicates that the proposal will not have the list of specific working and walking the Part 570 subpart E prohibits minors significant impacts on a substantial areas will help to simplify subpart F. from working in all occupations in number of small entities. OSHA’s PEA wrecking, demolition, and shipbreaking and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Proposed Deletions operations, which are defined as ‘‘all include: A description of the industries OSHA proposes not to include in work, including clean-up and salvage potentially affected by the proposal; an revised subpart F the following work, performed at the site of the total evaluation of the risks the proposal provisions that are currently applicable or partial razing, demolishing, or addresses; an assessment of the benefits to shipyard employment. The hazards dismantling of a building, bridge, attributable to the proposal; a and working conditions these steeple, tower, chimney, other structure, determination of the technological provisions address are not present in the ship or other vessel’’ (§ 570.66). OSHA feasibility of the proposed requirements; shipyard industry. believes that the § 1915.97(e) an estimate of the costs employers Section 1910.141(f)—OSHA is prohibitions are duplicative of the part would incur to comply with the proposing not to retain the existing 570 prohibitions, therefore, the Agency proposal; a determination of the requirement to provide facilities to dry is proposing to delete the section. economic feasibility of compliance with

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72505

the proposal; and an analysis of the million. Monetized benefits, therefore, its estimates of the number of firms, economic and other impacts associated would total $15.4 million annually. establishments, employment, and wages with this rulemaking, including those Affected Establishments and on BLS and U.S. Census Bureau data for on small businesses. The executive Employees. The proposal will affect all North American Industrial summary of the PEA is presented here establishments in shipyard Classification (NAIC) industry sector and the full analysis has been placed in employment, which consists of 336611. Also, OSHA used firm data the rulemaking docket (Ex. 17). shipbuilding, shipbreaking, ship repair from SBA in this analysis. Profit rates OSHA’s preliminary analysis and related employment. For purposes are based on data from the Internal estimates that the proposal will affect of this analysis, OSHA incorporated the Revenue Service’s 2001 Corporation approximately 639 establishments and following three definitions of ‘‘small Source Book of Statistics of Income. 86,764 employees in the shipyard firms’’ and provided separate analyses employment industry. OSHA estimates for each: (1) Firms with fewer than Table 6 shows the total number of that the proposal will prevent 1.1 deaths 1,000 employees (the Small Business establishments, number of firms, and 142.2 injuries and cost employers Administration (SBA) definition of employment, revenues and payroll per about $1 million per year to implement. small businesses in this sector); (2) firms establishment affected by the proposed The Agency estimates $7.1 million in with fewer than 250 employees (the rule. As the table shows, there are 614 monetized benefits from these definition of small business firms with 639 establishments in the prevented injuries. Following OMB recommended by the Shipyard Fire affected industry. The industry employs guidelines to monetize all benefits, Protection Negotiated Rulemaking 86,764 employees, of whom 72 percent OSHA estimates the value of a statistical Advisory Committee); and (3) firms with are estimated to be production life of 1.1 prevented deaths at $8.3 fewer than 20 employees. OSHA based employees.

TABLE 6.—INDUSTRIAL PROFILE FOR THE PROPOSED STANDARD

Annual Establish- Production (1,000) Size class Firms ments Employees employees Payroll Revenues

Shipyards ...... 1,000 & Up ...... 4 9 59,456 42,808 $2,402,689 $8,650,079 500–999 ...... 7 12 9,075 6,534 310,743 1,191,169 250–499 ...... 19 21 5,813 4,185 276,533 923,357 100–249 ...... 43 49 5,813 4,189 305,522 925,760 20–99 ...... 50 53 2,793 2,011 139,667 459,032 Off-Site ...... 20–99 ...... 76 80 1,957 1,409 94,511 354,512 1–19 ...... 415 415 1,852 1,333 98,717 310,665

Total ...... 614 639 86,764 62,470 3,628,382 12,814,574 Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis.

Evaluation of Risk and Potential injuries, and 92.3 non-lost workday today. For example, a number of Benefits. OSHA’s risk profile for injuries, as stated in Chapter IV of the shipyard employers already are training exposure to the hazards the proposal PEA Ex. 17. their employees about the release of addresses is based on data from the In addition to saving lives and hazardous energy in servicing CFOI database and the BLS Survey of reducing injuries in shipyards, OSHA operations. Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, as believes that compliance with the Annualized compliance cost estimates well as an analysis of OSHA fatality/ proposal would yield substantial cost are annualized costs to employers using catastrophe inspection data obtained savings to parties within and connected a 7 percent discount rate and a ten year from the Agency’s IMIS database. with the shipyard employment industry life for one-time expenses. These OSHA anticipates that the proposal and ultimately to society as a whole. proposed estimates are based on the will significantly reduce the number of These monetized benefits take the form employment and establishment counts shipyard accidents involving electrical of willingness to pay estimates to avoid in Chapter II (Industrial Profile) of the contacts, being caught in machinery, an injury or death. OSHA estimates PEA, (Ex. 17) and the dollar costs and being struck by motor vehicles and monetized benefits of $7.1 million from needed to comply. These estimates also their resulting injuries and fatalities. the 142.2 avoided injuries from consider non-compliance rates to OSHA believes that the proposed compliance with the proposal. When account for establishments that have requirements for controlling hazardous the monetized benefit of 1.1 avoided already complied with the energy (i.e., energy control procedures, deaths ($8.3 million) is added, total requirements. training, inspections) and motor vehicle annual monetized benefits equal $15.4 To develop the proposed cost safety will help to save lives and million. estimates, OSHA first examined the prevent injuries in the shipyard Technological Feasibility and extent to which shipyard employers workforce. OSHA also believes that the Compliance Costs (including Net were already in compliance with new proposed CPR requirements for Benefits). Consistent with the legal existing and proposed OSHA first aid providers will help to save lives framework established by the OSH Act requirements, with rules of other parties and reduce the severity of injuries that and court decisions, OSHA has (such as the U.S. Navy in some do occur. OSHA estimates that determined that the proposal is shipyards), and with voluntary codes compliance with the proposal would technologically feasible. The proposal and best practices. Identifying annually prevent 1.1 fatalities, 49.9 does not require any practices not provisions for which there is already cases involving days away from work already undertaken in many shipyards substantial or full compliance, OSHA

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72506 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

arrived at a list of activities for which total annualized costs of the proposal, associated with the requirements for shipyard employers would incur costs, by major provision, which total controlling hazardous energy (Lockout/ shown in Table 7. Table 7 presents the $1,010,778. Most of the costs are Tagout).

TABLE 7.—ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUALIZED COMPLIANCE COSTS BY PROVISION

Total annualized Requirement costs

Sanitation: Handwashing Facilities ...... $254,540 Medical Services and First Aid: CPR Training ...... 136,442 Lockout/Tagout: Energy Control Program ...... 107,857 Full Employee Protection ...... 330,373 Protective Materials & Hardware ...... 16,069 Training and Communication ...... 132,622 Periodic Inspections & Certification ...... 20,006

Subtotal ...... 606,927

Vehicle Safety: Reinstalling Safety Equipment ...... 12,762 Rim Wheel Training ...... 107

Subtotal ...... 12,869

Total ...... 1,010,778 Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis, OSHA.

Net Benefits. For informational sector by comparing costs as a OSHA estimates that if affected purposes, the Agency compared the percentage of revenues and costs as a establishments in the shipyard estimated costs of compliance to the percentage of profits. These two employment sector were forced to monetized benefits of the proposed measures (in percentages) correspond to absorb these compliance costs entirely standard. The Agency estimates two assumptions used by economists to from profits (a highly unlikely scenario), monetized death benefits of $8.3 million set bounds for the range of possible profits would be reduced by an average dollars and monetized injury benefits of impacts. One assumption is no-cost of 0.14 percent. At the other extreme, if $7.1 million annually (see Chapter IV of pass-through (i.e., that employers will affected establishments were able to the PEA). This yields total monetized be unable to pass any of the costs of pass all of these compliance costs compliance forward to their customers). benefits of $15.4 million annually. forward to their customers, OSHA This corresponds to compliance costs as When the costs of compliance are projects that the price (revenue) increase compared to these estimates, the Agency a percentage of profits. The second required to pay for these costs would be concludes that the annualized net assumption is full-cost pass-through less than 0.01 percent. Given the benefits of the proposed standard equal (i.e., that employers will be able to pass minimal potential impact on both prices $14.4 million. all of the costs of compliance forward to Economic Impacts. OSHA analyzed their customers). This corresponds to and profits, OSHA concludes that the the impacts of these compliance costs compliance costs as a percentage of proposed regulation is economically on firms in the shipyard employment revenues. As summarized in Table 8, feasible.

TABLE 8.—ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Per establish- Compliance cost ment compliance as a % of reve- Compliance cost cost nues as a % of profits

Size Class: 1–19 ...... $56 0.01 0.20 1–250 ...... 422 0.01 0.16 1–1,000 ...... 749 0.01 0.20 All ...... 1,582 0.01 0.14 Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis.

Regulatory Flexibility Screening As shown in Table 9, for firms with less ‘‘small entity’’ recommended by the Analysis. The RFA requires regulatory than 1,000 employees, proposed costs Shipyard Fire Protection Negotiated agencies to determine whether are 0.20 percent of profits and 0.01 Rulemaking Advisory Committee and regulatory actions will adversely affect percent of revenues. OSHA also for firms with less than 20 employees to small entities. For employers in NAIC examined costs as a percentage of see whether there might be significant 336611, small firms are defined by SBA profits and revenues for firms with less impacts on the very smallest firms. For as those with less than 1,000 employees. than 250 employees, a definition of firms with less than 250 employees,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72507

proposed costs were 0.16 percent of proposed costs were 0.20 percent of in impacts is the low estimated profits and 0.01 percent of revenues. For profits and 0.01 percent of revenues. compliance costs incurred by the small firms with less than 20 employees, The major source of the small variation firms.

TABLE 9.—SMALL FIRM IMPACTS

Compliance cost Per firm compli- as a % of reve- Compliance cost ance cost nues as a % of profits

Size Class: 1–19 ...... $59 0.01 0.20 1–250 ...... 432 0.01 0.16 1–1,000 ...... 768 0.01 0.20 All ...... 1,645 0.01 0.14 Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis

OSHA has set the criteria that if costs agencies, to the extent possible, refrain this standard is written, to the extent exceed one percent of revenues or five from limiting State policy options, possible, in general performance- percent of profits, then the impact on consult with States prior to taking any oriented terms, there is considerable small entities is considered significant actions that would restrict State policy flexibility for State Plans to require, and for purposes of complying with the options, and take such actions only for employers to use, methods of RFA. For all of the classes of affected when there is clear constitutional compliance which are appropriate to the small firms in the shipyard employment authority and the presence of a problem working conditions covered by the industry, the costs of the proposal of national scope. The Order provides standard. However, most shipyards even would be less than one percent of for preemption of State law only if there in State Plan States remain subject to revenues and five percent of profits. is a clear constitutional authority and Federal OSHA jurisdiction as only a few OSHA therefore certifies that this the presence of a problem of national States (California, Minnesota, Vermont proposal will not have an economically scope. Additionally, the Order provides and Washington) have elected to cover significant impact on a substantial for preemption of State law only if there shipyards and other maritime number of small entities. is a clear Congressional intent for the employment. Non-Regulatory Alternatives. OSHA Agency to do so. Any such preemption The Agency concludes that this concludes that economic and social is to be limited to the extent possible. proposed rule complies with E.O. alternatives to a federal workplace Section 18 of the OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 13132. In States without OSHA- standard fail to adequately protect 667) expresses Congress’ clear intent to approved State Plans, Congress employees in the shipyard employment preempt State laws relating to issues on expressly provides for OSHA standards industry from the hazards the proposal which Federal OSHA has promulgated to preempt State job safety and health addresses. Tort liability laws and occupational safety or health standards. rules in areas addressed by Agency workers’ compensation provide some Under the OSH Act, a State can avoid standards; in these States, the proposed protection, but institutional factors limit preemption on issues covered by rule would limit State policy options in effective means of addressing the Federal standards only if it submits, and the same manner as every OSHA significant costs of occupational injuries obtains Federal approval of, a plan for standard. In States with OSHA- and illnesses. Therefore, OSHA finds the development of such standards and approved State Plans, this action would that this proposal will provide the their enforcement. Occupational safety not significantly limit State policy necessary remedy. and health standards developed by such options; these States will be able to State Plan States must, among other address any special conditions within VI. Environmental Assessment things, be at least as effective in the framework of the OSH Act while The proposed standard has been providing safe and healthful ensuring that their standards are at least reviewed in accordance with the employment and places of employment as effective as the Federal standard. requirements of the National as the Federal standards. Where such State comments are invited on this Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of standards are applicable to products proposal and will be fully considered 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the distributed or used in interstate prior to promulgation of a final rule. regulations of the Council on commerce, they may not unduly burden Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR commerce or must be justified by VIII. Unfunded Mandates part 1500), and DOL NEPA Procedures compelling local conditions (see section For the purposes of the Unfunded (29 CFR part 11). The provisions of the 18(c)(2)). The Federal standards on Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. standard focus on the reduction and shipyard employment operations 1501, et seq.), as well as E.O. 12875, this avoidance of accidents occurring in address hazards that are not unique to rule does not include any Federal shipyard employment. Consequently, no any one State or region of the country. mandate that may result in increased major negative impact is foreseen on air, Subject to these requirements, States expenditures by State, local, and tribal water or soil quality, plant or animal with occupational safety and health governments, or increased expenditures life, the use of land or other aspects of plans approved under section 18 of the by the private sector of more than $100 the environment. OSH Act are free to develop and enforce million. under State law their own requirements VII. Federalism for safety and health standards. A State IX. OMB Review Under the Paperwork OSHA has reviewed this proposed Plan State can develop its own State Reduction Act of 1995 rule in accordance with E.O. 13132 (64 standards to deal with any special The proposed standard for General FR 43255 (8/10/1999)) regarding problems that might be encountered in Working Conditions in Shipyard Federalism. This Order requires that a particular State. Moreover, because Employment contains collection-of-

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72508 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

information (paperwork) requirements • Ways to minimize the burden on hazardous working conditions that that are subject to review by the Office employers who must comply, for subpart F does not currently address. of Management and Budget (OMB) example, by using automated or other These proposed additions include the under the Paperwork Reduction Act of technological information collection control of hazardous energy (lockout/ 1995 (PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and transmission techniques. tagout); motor vehicle safety equipment, and OMB regulations (5 CFR part 1320). The title, description of the need for operation and maintenance; accident The PRA–95 defines ‘‘collection of and proposed use of the information, prevention tags; and servicing multi- information’’ as ‘‘the obtaining, causing summary of the collections of piece and single piece rim wheels. to be obtained, soliciting, or requiring information, description of respondents, OSHA adopted the existing subpart F the disclosure to third parties or the and frequency of response of the standards in 1972 (37 FR 22458 (10/19/ public of facts or opinions by or for an information collection are described 1972)) pursuant to section 6(a) of the agency regardless of form or format below, along with an estimate of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of ***’’ (44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)). annual reporting burden and cost as 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.). The collection-of-information required by 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) and Section 6(a) permitted OSHA, within requirements identified in the NPRM 1320.8(d)(2). two years of the passage of the OSH Act, have been submitted to OMB for review Title: General Working Conditions in to adopt as an occupational safety or (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). OSHA solicits Shipyard Employment (29 CFR part health standard any national consensus comments on the collection-of- 1915, subpart F). and established Federal standards (29 information requirements and the Description and Proposed Use of the U.S.C. 655(a)). The provisions in estimated burden hours associated with Collection-of-Information Requirements subpart F were adopted from existing these collections including comment on Federal regulations promulgated under OSHA is proposing to revise and the following: Section 41 of the Longshore and Harbor • update the existing standards in subpart Whether the proposed collection-of- Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) F of 29 CFR part 1915 that address information requirements are necessary (33 U.S.C. 941), as well as national hazardous working conditions in for the proper performance of the consensus standards. Agency’s functions, including whether shipyard employment. These standards the information is useful; cover many diverse working conditions OSHA believes the proposed revisions • The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of in shipyard employment, including and additions to subpart F are necessary the burden (time and costs) of the housekeeping, lighting, utilities, work in and reasonable to protect the safety and collection-of-information requirements, confined or isolated spaces, lifeboats, health of shipyard employees. including the validity of the sanitation, and medical services and The following table identifies and methodology and assumptions used; first aid. describes the need for the new • The quality, utility, and clarity of OSHA also proposes to add new collection-of-information requirements the information collected; and requirements to protect employees from contained in the proposed standard.

TABLE 10.—COLLECTION OF INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THE PROPOSED STANDARD

Collection-of-Information Requirements Contained in the Proposed Standard

§ 1915.87(f)(3): The employer shall store stretchers in a clearly-marked location in a manner that prevents damage and protects them from envi- ronmental conditions. Marking the location of the stretchers ensures that they will be easily located in the event of an emergency.

§ 1915.89(b)(4)(i): Energy control procedures. (i) Procedures shall be developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially haz- ardous energy when employees are engaged in the activities covered by this section. Employers use this information as the basis for effectively identifying operations and processes in the workplace that require energy control pro- cedures; ensuring the safe application, use and removal of energy controls; and providing information and training to employees about the purpose and function of energy-control procedures. These procedures ensure that employees are protected while working on machines, equipment or systems that potentially contain hazardous energy.

§ 1915.89(b)(6)(i): The employer shall conduct a periodic inspection of each energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the proce- dures and the requirements of this standard are being followed and to correct any deficiencies. This information will be used as a basis for employee retraining and to determine whether employers need to revise their energy control proce- dures.

§ 1915.89(b)(6)(ii): The employer shall certify that the periodic inspections have been performed. The certification shall identify the machine, equipment or system on which the energy control procedure was being utilized, the date of the inspection, the employees included in the in- spection and the person performing the inspection. Certifying the inspections assures that the employer has performed a periodic inspection.

§ 1915.89(b)(7)(iv): Certification. The employer shall certify that employee training has been accomplished and is being kept up to date. The certification shall contain each employee’s name and dates of training. Written certification assures the employer that employees receive the training specified by the Standard.

§ 1915.89(b)(9): Notification of employees. Affected employees shall be notified by the employer or authorized employee of the application and removal of lockout devices or tagout devices. Notification shall be given before the controls are applied, and after they are removed from the machine, equipment or system. § 1915.89(d)(2)(ii): After lockout or tagout devices have been removed and before a machine equipment or system is started, affected employ- ees shall be notified that the lockout or tagout device(s) have been removed. OSHA is not taking a paperwork burden for this specification because it does not add burden to the notification requirement in paragraph (b)(9). § 1915.89(d)(3)(ii): Lockout or tagout devices removal. Each lockout or tagout device shall be removed from each energy isolating device by the employee who applied the device.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72509

TABLE 10.—COLLECTION OF INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THE PROPOSED STANDARD—Continued

Collection-of-Information Requirements Contained in the Proposed Standard

Exception to paragraph (d)(3): When the authorized employee who applied the lockout or tagout device is not available to remove it, that device may be removed under the direction of the employer, provided that specific procedures and training for such removal have been developed, documented and incorporated into the employer’s energy control program. The employer shall demonstrate that the specific procedure pro- vides equivalent safety to the removal of the device by the authorized employee who applied it. The specific procedures shall include at least the following elements: (ii) Making all reasonable efforts to contact the authorized employee to inform he or she that his or her lockout or tagout device has been removed; and (iii) Ensuring that the authorized employee has this knowledge before he/she resumes work at that facility. Such notification informs employees of the impending interruption of the normal production operations, and serves as a reminder of the restric- tions imposed on them by the energy-control program. In addition, this requirement ensures that employees do not attempt to reactivate a machine or piece of equipment after an authorized employee isolates its energy source and renders it inoperative. Notifying employees after removing an energy-control device alerts them that the machines and equipment are no longer safe for servicing, maintenance, and repair.

§ 1915.89(e)(2)(i): Outside personnel (contractors, ship’s crew, etc.) Whenever outside servicing personnel such as contractors or ship’s crew are to be engaged in activities covered by the scope and application of this standard, the on-site employer and the outside employer shall in- form each other of their respective lockout or tagout procedures. This provision ensures that each employer knows about the unique energy-control procedures used by the other employer preventing any mis- understanding regarding the implementation of lockout or tagout procedures.

§ 1915.94 Servicing multi-piece and single piece rim wheels. § 1910.177(d)(5): Current charts or rim manuals containing instructions for the type of wheels being serviced shall be available in the service area. Paragraph (d)(3)(iv) requires that when restraining devices and barriers are removed from service because they are defective, they shall not be returned to service until they are repaired and reinspected. If the repair is structural, the manufacturer or a Registered Professional Engineer must certify that the strength requirements specified in (d)(3)(i) of the Standard have been met. The certification records are used to assure that equipment has been repaired properly. The certification records also provide the most efficient means for OSHA compliance officers to determine that an employer is complying with the Standard.

OMB Control Number: 1218 0NEW. To read or download the complete least as effective as the final Federal Affected Public: Business or other for- ICR, go to http://www.regulations.gov rule, must be applicable to both the profit. (Docket No. OSHA–S049–2006–0675) or private and public (i.e., State and local Number of Respondents: 639. http://www.dockets.osha.gov (Docket government employees) sectors, and Frequency: On occasion. No. S–049). You also may obtain an must be completed within six months of Average Time per response: Time per electronic copy of the complete ICR at the publication date of the final Federal response ranges from 15 seconds for http://www.reginfo.gov. Click on rule. When OSHA promulgates a new affected employees to be notified of the ‘‘Inventory of Approved Information standard or amendment that does not application and removal of lockout and Collection Collections, Collection Under impose additional or more stringent tagout devices to 80 hours for large Review, Recently Approved/Expired,’’ requirements than an existing standard, shipyards (shipyards employing more then scroll under ‘‘Currently Under States are not required to revise their than 250 employees) to develop energy Review’’ to Department of Labor (DOL) standards, although the Agency may control procedures. to view all of DOL’s ICRs, including encourage them to do so. The 26 States Estimated Total Burden hours: those ICRS submitted for proposed and Territories with OSHA-approved 10,491. rulemakings. For further information, Estimated Costs (Operation and contact Mr. Todd Owen, OSHA, State Plans are: Alaska, Arizona, Maintenance): 0. Directorate of Standards and Guidance, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Interested parties who wish to OSHA, Room N–3609, U.S. Department Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, comment on the collection-of- of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North information requirements contained in NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South this proposal must send their written (202) 693–2222. Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, comments regarding the burden hour Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. and cost estimates or other aspects of X. State Plan States Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and the information collection request to the When Federal OSHA promulgates a the Virgin Islands have OSHA-approved Office of Information and Regulatory new standard or standards amendment State Plans that apply to State and local Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for which imposes additional or more government employees only. OSHA (RIN 1218–AB50), Office of stringent requirements than an existing Since this proposed rule imposes Management and Budget, Room 10235, standard, the 26 States and U.S. additional or more stringent 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC Territories with their own OSHA- requirements, State Plans that cover 20503. The Agency also encourages approved occupational safety and health maritime issues and/or have public commenters to submit their comments plans must revise their standards to employees working in the maritime on these collection-of-information reflect the new standard or amendment, requirements to OSHA, along with their or show the Agency why such action is industries covered by this standard comments on the proposed rule. (See unnecessary (e.g., because an existing would be required to revise their ADDRESSES section.). Persons are not State standard covering this area already standard appropriately within six required to respond to the collection of is at least as effective as the new Federal months of publication of the final rule. information unless it displays a valid standard or amendment) (29 U.S.C. OMB number. 553.5(a)). The State standard must be at

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72510 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

XI. Public Participation www.regulations.gov and/or http:// Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. It dockets.osha.gov indexes, some is issued under sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Submission of Comments and Access to information (e.g., copyrighted material) Occupational Safety and Health Act of Docket is not publicly available to read or 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657), section OSHA invites comments on all download through those Webpages. All 941 of the Longshore and Harbor aspects of the proposed rule. submissions and exhibits, including Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. Throughout this document OSHA has copyrighted material, are available for 901 et seq.), Secretary of Labor’s Order invited comment on specific issues and inspection and copying at the OSHA No. 5–2007 (72 FR 31159), and 29 CFR requested information and data about Docket Office. Information on using part 1911. practices at your establishment and in http://www.regulations.gov to submit your industry. OSHA will carefully Signed at Washington, DC this 7th day of comments and access dockets is December, 2007. review and evaluate these comments, available at the Webpage’s User Tips Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., information and data, as well as all link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office other information in the rulemaking Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational for information about materials not Safety and Health. record, to determine how to proceed. available through the Webpage and for You may submit comments in assistance in using the Internet to locate XIII. The Proposed Standard response to this document (1) docket submissions. For the reasons set forth in the electronically at http:// Electronic copies of this Federal www.regulations.gov, which is the preamble, OSHA proposes to amend 29 Register document are available at CFR parts 1910 and 1915 as follows: Federal eRulemaking Portal; (2) by http://www.regulations.gov. This facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All document, as well as news releases and PART 1910—[AMENDED] comments, attachments and other other relevant information, also are material must identify the Agency name available at OSHA’s Webpage at http:// Part 1910 of title 29 of the Code of and the OSHA docket number for this www.osha.gov. Federal Regulation is hereby proposed rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA–S049– to be amended as follows: 2006–0675). You may supplement Requests for Informal Public Hearings electronic submissions by uploading Under section 6(b)(3) of the OSH Act Subpart J—[Amended] document files electronically. If, (29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1911.11, 1. The authority citation for subpart J instead, you wish to mail additional interested parties may request an materials in reference to an electronic or of 29 CFR part 1910 is revised to read informal public hearing. Hearing as follows: fax submission, you must submit three requests must be submitted to the OSHA copies to the OSHA Docket Office (see Docket Office at the address above and Authority: Secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational ADDRESSES section). The additional must comply with the following: Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, materials must clearly identify your (1) The hearing requests must include 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12– electronic comments by name, date, and 71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 the name and address of the person (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 docket number so OSHA can attach submitting them; FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67 them to your comments. (2) The hearing requests must be FR 65008) or 5–2007 (72 FR 31159) as Because of security-related submitted (postmarked or sent) by applicable. procedures, the use of regular mail may March 19, 2008. Section 1910.145 also issued under 29 CFR cause a significant delay in the receipt (3) The hearing requests must specify part 1911. of comments. For information about with particularity the provision of the 2. In § 1910.145, paragraphs (a)(1) and security procedures concerning the proposed rule to which each objection (f)(1)(ii) are revised to read as follows: delivery of materials by hand, express is taken and the basis for the objection; delivery, messenger or courier service, (4) Each hearing request must be § 1910.145 Specifications for accident please contact the OSHA Docket Office separately stated and numbered; and prevention signs and tags. at (202) 693–2350 (TTY (877) 889– (5) The hearing requests must be (a) Scope. (1) These specifications 5627). accompanied by a detailed summary of apply to the design, application, and use Comments and submissions in the evidence proposed to be presented of signs or symbols (as included in response to this Federal Register notice at the requested hearing. paragraphs (c) through (e) of this are posted without change at http:// List of Subjects section) intended to indicate and, www.regulations.gov (Docket No. insofar as possible, to define specific _ OSHA–S049–2006–0675 ). Therefore, 29 CFR Part 1910 hazards of a nature such that failure to OSHA cautions commenters about Hazardous substances, Occupational designate them may lead to accidental submitting personal information such as safety and health, Reporting and injury to workers or the public, or both, social security numbers and date of recordkeeping requirements, and or to property damage. These birth. Vessels. specifications are intended to cover all Exhibits referenced in this Federal 29 CFR Part 1915 safety signs except those designed for Register document are posted at streets, highways, and railroads. These http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. Hazardous substances, Longshore and specifications do not apply to plant OSHA–S049–2006–0675) and/or at harbor workers, Occupational safety and bulletin boards or to safety posters. http://dockets.osha.gov (OSHA Docket health, Reporting and recordkeeping * * * * * Nos. S–049, SESAC–1988 through requirements, and Vessels. SESAC–1993, MACOSH–1995 through (f) * * * MACOSH–2005, S–012, S–012A, S– XII. Authority and Signature (1) * * * 012B, S–024, H–308). This document was prepared under (ii) This paragraph (f) does not apply Although all submissions in response the direction of Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., to construction or agriculture. to this Federal Register notice and Assistant Secretary of Labor for * * * * * exhibits referenced in this Federal Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. 3. In § 1910.147, paragraph (a)(1) is Register notice are listed in the http:// Department of Labor, 200 Constitution revised to read as follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72511

§ 1910.147 The control of hazardous Authority: Sec. 41, Longshore and Harbor surfaces. All other tools, materials, and energy (lockout/tagout). Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 941); equipment shall be stored or located in (a) Scope, application, and purpose— secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety and Health an area that does not interfere with (1) Scope. Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); walking and working surfaces. Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR (i) This standard covers the servicing 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR (d) The employer shall ensure that the and maintenance of machines and 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), floor or deck of every work area shall be equipment in which the unexpected 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67 FR 65008) maintained, so far as practicable, in a energization or start up of the machines or 5–2007 (72 FR 31159) as applicable; 29 dry condition. Where wet processes are or equipment, or release of stored CFR part 1911. used, drainage shall be maintained and energy could cause injury to employees. the employer shall provide false floors, This standard establishes minimum Subpart F—[Amended] platforms, mats or other dry standing performance requirements for the 7. Subpart F of 29 CFR part 1915 is places. Where this is not practicable, the control of such hazardous energy. revised to read as follows: employer shall provide appropriate (ii) This standard does not cover the waterproof footgear, such as rubber following: Subpart F—General Working Conditions overboots, in accordance with (A) Construction and agriculture Sec. § 1915.152. employment; and 1915.80 Scope and application. (e) The employer shall ensure that (B) Employment covered by parts 1915.81 Housekeeping. walking and working surfaces are kept 1915.82 Lighting. clear of debris, including solid and 1915, 1917, and 1918 of this title. 1915.83 Utilities. Note to paragraph (a)(1): Section 1910.147 1915.84 Work in confined or isolated liquid wastes, and other objects that applies to the servicing of equipment spaces. may create a safety or health hazard to onboard vessels that is used for inherently 1915.85 Vessel radar and radio transmitters. employees, such as protruding nails, general industry operations such as fish 1915.86 Lifeboats. splinters, loose boards, and unnecessary processing. However, if such servicing is part 1915.87 Medical services and first aid. holes and openings. of a general overhaul and repair of the entire 1915.88 Sanitation. (f) The employer shall ensure that free vessel, part 1915 applies. 1915.89 Control of hazardous energy access is maintained to exits, firealarm (lockout/tagout). * * * * * boxes, fire call stations, and firefighting 1915.90 Safety color code for marking equipment. physical hazards. Subpart N—[Amended] 1915.91 Accident prevention signs and tags. (g) The employer shall ensure that 1915.92 Retention of DOT markings, slippery conditions, such as snow and 4. The authority citation for subpart N placards, and labels. ice, on walking and working surfaces of 29 CFR part 1910 is revised to read 1915.93 Motor vehicle safety equipment, are eliminated as they occur. as follows: operation, and maintenance. (h) The employer shall ensure that Authority: Secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational 1915.94 Servicing multi-piece and single- construction materials are stacked in a Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, piece rim wheels. manner that does not create a hazard to 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12– 1915.95 Definitions. employees. 71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 Subpart F—General Working (i) The employer shall ensure that (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 hoses and electrical service cords are FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67 Conditions FR 65008) or 5–2007 (72 FR 31159) as hung over or placed under walking and applicable. § 1915.80 Scope and application. working surfaces or covered by Section 1910.177 also issued under 29 CFR The provisions of this subpart apply crossovers to prevent injury to part 1911. to general working conditions in employees and damage to the hoses and cords. 5. In § 1910.177, paragraph (a)(2) is shipyard employment, regardless of (j) The employer shall ensure that revised to read as follows: geographic location, including work onboard vessels, vessel sections, and flammable substances, such as paint § 1910.177 Servicing multi-piece and landside operations. thinners, solvents, rags and waste, are single piece rim wheels. stored in covered fire-resistant § 1915.81 Housekeeping. (a) * * * containers when not in use. (2) This section does not apply to (a) The employer shall maintain good (k) The employer shall ensure that employers and places of employment housekeeping conditions to ensure that combustible scrap is removed from regulated under the Longshoring walking and working surfaces do not work areas as soon as possible. create a hazard for employees. The Standards, 29 CFR part 1918, § 1915.82 Lighting. Construction Safety Standards, 29 CFR employer shall ensure that these part 1926; or Agriculture Standards, 29 conditions are maintained at all times. (a) General Requirements. (1) The CFR part 1928. (b) The employer shall ensure that employer shall ensure that each area of walking and working surfaces provide the workplace is illuminated to at least * * * * * adequate space for work and passage. the intensities in Table 1 whenever an PART 1915—[AMENDED] (c) The employer shall ensure that employee is present. The requirement to only tools, materials, and equipment provide illumination in accordance with 6. The authority citation for part 1915 necessary to perform the job in progress Table 1 applies to permanent and is revised to read as follows: are kept on walking and working temporary lighting.

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART F.—MINIMUM LIGHTING INTENSITIES IN FOOT-CANDLES

Lumens (foot-candles) Area or operation

3 ...... General areas on vessels and vessel sections such as accessways, exits, gangways, stairs, and walkways. 5 ...... General landside areas such as corridors, exits, stairs, and walkways.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72512 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART F.—MINIMUM LIGHTING INTENSITIES IN FOOT-CANDLES—Continued

Lumens (foot-candles) Area or operation

5 ...... All assigned work areas on any vessel or vessel section. Landside tunnels, shafts, vaults, pumping stations, and underground work areas. 10 ...... Landside work areas such as machine shops, electrical equipment rooms, carpenter shops, lofts, tool rooms, warehouses, and outdoor work areas. 10 ...... Changing rooms, showers, sewered toilet facilities, and eating, drinking, and break areas. 30 ...... First aid stations, infirmaries, and offices.

Note to Table 1: The values in table 1 do is able to move safely if the temporary (c) Electric shore power. When a not apply to emergency or handheld portable lights fail. vessel is supplied with electric shore lights. (3) The employer shall ensure that power, the employer shall ensure the (2) The employer shall ensure that only explosion-proof, self-contained following precautions are taken prior to matches and open flame devices are not handheld portable lights are used in energizing the vessel’s circuits: used for lighting. areas that are not gas-free, or other (1) The vessel is grounded if it is in (b) Temporary lights. The employer electric equipment approved by a dry dock; shall ensure that temporary lights meet nationally recognized testing laboratory (2) Circuits to be energized are in a the following requirements: (NRTL). Handheld portable lights safe condition; and (1) Lights with bulbs that are not bearing the approval of a NRTL for the (3) Circuits to be energized are completely recessed are equipped with class and division of the location in equipped with over-current protection guards to prevent accidental contact; which they are used are considered to that does not exceed the rated current- (2) Lights are equipped with electric meet the requirements of this paragraph. carrying capacity of the conductors. cords designed with sufficient capacity § 1915.83 Utilities. (d) Heat lamps. The employer shall to safely carry the electric load; ensure that heat lamps, including the (3) Connections and insulation are (a) Steam supply system. The face, are equipped with surround-type maintained in a safe condition; employer shall ensure that the vessel’s guards to prevent contact with the lamp (4) Lights and lighting stringers are steam piping system, including hoses, and bulb. not suspended solely by their electric has a safe working pressure prior to cords unless they are designed by the supplying steam from an outside source. § 1915.84 Work in confined or isolated manufacturer to be suspended in this The employer shall ensure that each spaces. way; steam supply system meets the Except as provided in § 1915.51(c)(3) (5) Lighting stringers do not overload following: of this part, whenever an employee is branch circuits; (1) A pressure gauge and a relief valve working in a confined space or alone in (6) Branch circuits are equipped with are installed at the point where the an isolated location, the employer shall over-current protection whose capacity temporary steam hose joins the vessel’s ensure that each employee is: does not exceed the rated current- steam piping system; (a) Checked frequently during each carrying capacity of the cord used; (2) Each relief valve is set and is workshift to ensure the employee’s (7) Splices have insulation with a capable of relieving steam at a pressure safety; and capacity that exceeds that of the cable; that does not exceed the safe working (b) Accounted for at the end of each and pressure of the system in its present workshift. (8) Exposed, non-current-carrying condition; metal parts of lights are grounded. The (3) There are no means of § 1915.85 Vessel radar and radio employer shall ensure that grounding is disconnecting any relief valve from the transmitters. provided either through a third wire in system that it protects; (a) The employer shall secure each the cable containing the circuit (4) Each pressure gauge and relief radar and radio transmitter so it is conductors or through a separate wire valve is kept in legible condition and incapable of energizing or emitting that is grounded at the source of the located so it is visible and readily radiation before any employee begins to current. Grounding shall be done in accessible; and work on it or on a mast, king post, or accordance with the requirements of (5) The relief valve is positioned or other area near the radar or radio § 1915.132(b). placed in a location where it is not transmitter. (c) Handheld portable lights. (1) In likely to cause injury if it is activated. (b) The employer shall ensure that any dark area that does not have (b) Steam hoses. The employer shall hazardous energy is controlled in permanent or temporary lights, where ensure that each steam hose meets the accordance with § 1915.89 Control of lights are not working, or are not readily following: Hazardous Energy prior to servicing, accessible, the employer shall provide (1) The steam hose and its fittings repairing or testing any vessel radar or handheld portable lights and ensure that have a safety factor of at least five (5); radio transmitter. employees do not enter those areas (2) The steam hose is hung with short (c) The employer shall schedule the without such lights. bights to prevent chafing and to reduce testing of radar or radio transmitter at a (2) Where temporary lighting from tension on the hose and its fittings; time when no work is in progress aloft sources outside the vessel or vessel (3) Each steam hose is protected from or when personnel can be cleared a section is the only means of damage; and minimum safe distance from the danger illumination, the employer shall ensure (4) Each steam hose or temporary area. The employer shall follow that handheld portable lights are piping passing through a walking or minimum safe distances established for available in the immediate work area to working area is shielded to protect the type, model, and power of the provide illumination so each employee employees from contact. equipment being tested.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72513

§ 1915.86 Lifeboats. splashed with hazardous or toxic potentially infectious materials while using (a) The employer shall ensure that substances, the employer shall provide first aid supplies, employers are required to before any employee works in or on a facilities for quick drenching or flushing provide appropriate personal protective lifeboat, either in a stowed or suspended the eyes and body. The employer shall equipment (PPE) in compliance with the provisions of the Occupational Exposure to position, that the lifeboat is secured ensure that a facility is located within Bloodborne Pathogens standard, independently of the releasing gear to each work area for immediate § 1910.1030(d)(3) (56 FR 64175). This prevent it from falling or capsizing. emergency use. standard lists appropriate PPE for this type (b) The employer shall not permit any (f) Basket stretchers. (1) The employer of exposure, such as gloves, gowns, face employee to be in a lifeboat while it is shall ensure there are an adequate shields, masks, and eye protection. being hoisted. number of basket stretchers, or the (c) The employer shall not permit any equivalent, readily accessible where § 1915.88 Sanitation employee to work on the outboard side work is being performed onboard a (a) General Requirements. (1) The of a lifeboat that is stowed on chocks vessel or vessel section. employer shall provide adequate and unless the lifeboat is secured by gripes (2) The employer shall ensure each readily accessible sanitation facilities. or another device that prevents it from stretcher is equipped with: (2) The employer shall supply and swinging outboard. (i) Permanent lifting bridles that maintain each sanitation facility in a enable the stretcher to be attached to clean, sanitary, and serviceable § 1915.87 Medical services and first aid. hoisting gear and that are capable of condition. (a) General Requirement. The lifting at least 5,000 pounds (2,270 kg); (b) Potable water. (1) The employer employer shall ensure that medical (ii) Restraints that are capable of shall provide potable water for all services and first aid are readily securely holding the injured employee employee health and personal needs accessible. while the stretcher is lifted or moved; and ensure that only potable water is (b) Advice and consultation. The and used for these purposes. employer shall ensure that health care (iii) A blanket or other suitable (2) The employer shall provide professionals are readily available for covering for the injured employee. potable drinking water in amounts that advice and consultation on matters of (3) The employer shall store stretchers are adequate to meet the health and workplace health. in a clearly-marked location in a manner personal needs of each employee. (c) First aid providers. (1) The that prevents damage and protects them (3) The employer shall dispense employer shall ensure that there are an from environmental conditions. drinking water from a fountain, a adequate number of employees at each (4) The employer shall inspect covered container with single-use work location during each workshift stretchers at intervals that ensure they drinking cups stored in a sanitary who are qualified to render first aid, remain in a safe and serviceable receptacle, or single-use bottles. The including cardiopulmonary condition. employer shall prohibit the use of resuscitation (CPR). The employer shall shared drinking cups, dippers, and consider the following factors in Appendix A to § 1915.87—First Aid water bottles. determining the number of employees Kits (Non-Mandatory) (c) Non-potable water. (1) The who must have first aid training: Size 1. First aid supplies are required to be employer may use non-potable water for and location of each shipyard work adequate and readily accessible under other purposes such as firefighting and location; the number of employees at paragraphs § 1915.88(a) and (d). An example cleaning outdoor premises so long as it each work location; the nature of the of the minimal contents of a generic first aid does not contain chemicals, fecal hazards present at each work location; kit for workplace settings is described in matter, coliform or other substances at and the distance of each work location American National Standard (ANSI) Z308.1– levels that may create a hazard for from hospitals, clinics, and rescue 2003 ‘‘Minimum Requirements for employees. Workplace First Aid Kits.’’ The contents of (2) The employer shall clearly mark squads. the kit listed in the ANSI standard should be (2) The employer shall ensure that adequate for small work locations. When non-potable water supplies and outlets any employee designated to provide larger operations or multiple operations are as ‘‘not safe for health or personal use.’’ first aid has a valid first aid certificate, being conducted at the same location, (d) Toilet facilities—(1) General such as is issued by the Red Cross, employers should determine the need for requirements. The employer shall American Heart Association, or other additional first aid kits at the work location, ensure that sewered and portable toilet equivalent organization. additional types of first aid equipment and facilities: (d) First aid supplies.(1) The employer supplies, and additional quantities and types (i) Are separate for each sex, except as shall provide and maintain adequate of supplies and equipment in the first aid provided in paragraph (d)(1)(i)(B) of this first aid supplies at each work location. kits. section; (2) The employer shall ensure that the 2. In a similar fashion, employers who (A) The number of toilet facilities have unique or changing first aid needs in placement, content, and amount of first their workplace may need to enhance their provided for each sex shall be based on aid supplies are adequate for the size first aid kits. The employer can use the the maximum number of employees of and location of each work location, the OSHA 300 Log, OSHA 301’s or other reports that sex present at the workplace at any number of employees at each work to identify these unique problems. one time during a workshift. A single location, the nature of the hazards Consultation from the local fire/rescue occupancy toilet room shall be counted present at each work location, and the department, appropriate healthcare as one toilet regardless of the number of distance of each work location from professional, or local emergency room may toilets it contains; hospitals, clinics, and rescue squads. be helpful to employers in these (B) The employer does not have to (3) The employer shall inspect first circumstances. By assessing the specific provide separate toilet facilities for each aid supplies at intervals that ensure needs of their workplace, employers can sex where they will not be occupied by ensure that reasonably anticipated supplies supplies are in dry, sterile and are available. Employers should assess the more than one employee at a time, can serviceable condition. specific needs of their worksite periodically be locked from the inside, and contain (e) Quick drenching/flushing and augment first aid kits appropriately. at least one toilet; and facilities. Where there is a possibility 3. If it is reasonably anticipated that (ii) Ensure privacy at all times. Where that an employee could be injured if employees will be exposed to blood or other a toilet room contains more than one

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72514 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

toilet, each toilet shall occupy a separate disposing of them, clean individual not create a hazard for employees. compartment with a door and walls or sections of continuous cloth toweling, Waste receptacles for food shall be partitions between them that are or an air blower. emptied at least every day, unless sufficiently high to ensure privacy. (3) Exception for normally unattended unused. (2) Sewered toilet facilities. The work locations. The requirement to (2) The employer shall not permit employer shall provide at least the provide handwashing facilities does not employees to work in the immediate following number of sewered toilet apply to normally unattended work vicinity of uncovered garbage that could facilities for each sex. locations and mobile work crews, endanger their safety and health. provided that the employer ensures that (3) The employer shall ensure that TABLE 2 TO SUBPART F employees have immediately available employees working beneath or on the transportation to readily accessible outboard side of a vessel are not Number of employees Minimum number of sanitation facilities that are maintained contaminated by drainage or waste from of each sex toilet facilities in a clean, sanitary and serviceable overboard discharges. (j) Vermin control. (1) To the extent 1 to 15 ...... 1 condition and meet the requirements of 16 to 35 ...... 2 paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(2) of this reasonably practicable, the employer 36 to 55 ...... 3 section. shall clean and maintain the workplace 56 to 80 ...... 4 (4) The employer shall inform each in a manner that prevents the harborage 81 to 110 ...... 5 employee engaged in the application of of vermin such as rodents, insects and 111 to 150 ...... 6 paints or coatings or in other operations birds. Over 150 ...... 1 additional toilet fa- where hazardous or toxic substances (2) Where vermin are detected, the cility for each addi- can be ingested or absorbed about the employer shall implement and maintain tional 40 employ- need for removing surface contaminants an effective control program. ees. by thorough washing of hands and face § 1915.89 Control of hazardous energy at the end of the workshift and prior to (lockout/tagout). Note to Table 2. Where toilet facilities will eating, drinking, or smoking. only be used by men, urinals may be (f) Showers. (1) When showers are (a) Scope, application and purpose— provided instead of toilet facilities, except required by an OSHA standard, the (1) Scope. This standard covers the that the number of toilets in such cases shall employer shall provide one shower for servicing and maintenance of machines, not be reduced to less than 2⁄3rds of the equipment and systems in which the minimum specified. each 10, or fraction of 10 employees of each sex, who are required to shower energization or start up of the machines, (3) Portable toilet facilities. In during the same workshift. equipment, systems, or release of stored addition to the required number of (2) The employer shall ensure that energy, could cause injury to sewered toilet facilities, the employer each shower is equipped with soap, hot employees. This standard establishes may also provide portable toilet and cold water, and clean towels for minimum performance requirements for facilities. The employer shall ensure each employee who uses the shower. the control of such hazardous energy. that each portable toilet facility is (g) Changing rooms. When an (2) Application. (i) This standard maintained in a clean, sanitary and employer provides protective clothing applies to the control of hazardous serviceable condition, equipped with to prevent employee exposure to energy during servicing and adequate venting and, as necessary, hazardous or toxic substances, the maintenance of machines, equipment lighting and heating. employer shall provide the following: and systems, including those onboard (4) Exception for normally unattended (1) Changing rooms that provide vessels and vessel sections, including: work locations. The requirement to privacy for each sex; and (A) Servicing of ship’s systems by any provide toilet facilities does not apply to (2) Storage facilities for street clothes employee, including, but not limited to, normally unattended work locations and separate storage facilities for ship’s officers or crew of the vessel; and and mobile work crews, provided that protective clothing. (B) Servicing of machines, equipment the employer ensures that employees (h) Eating, drinking and break areas. and systems that employees use in the have immediately available The employer shall ensure that food, course of shipyard employment. transportation to readily accessible beverages and tobacco products are not (ii) Normal production operations are sanitation facilities that are maintained consumed or stored in any area where not covered by this standard (See in a clean, sanitary and serviceable hazardous or toxic substances may be subpart O of 29 CFR part 1910 and condition and meet the requirements of present. subpart H of this part for machine this section. (i) Waste disposal. (1) The employer guarding). Servicing and/or (e) Handwashing facilities. (1) The shall provide waste receptacles that maintenance which takes place during employer shall provide handwashing meet the following requirements: normal production operations is facilities at or adjacent to each toilet (i) Each receptacle is constructed of covered by this standard only if: facility. materials that are corrosion resistant, (A) An employee is required to (2) The employer shall ensure that leak-proof and easily cleaned or remove or bypass a guard or other safety each handwashing facility: disposable; device; or (i) Is equipped with either hot and (ii) Each receptacle is equipped with (B) An employee is required to place cold or lukewarm running water and a solid tight-fitting cover, unless it can any part of his or her body into an area soap, or with waterless skin cleansing be kept in clean, sanitary and on a machine, piece of equipment or agents that are capable of disinfecting serviceable condition without the use of system where work is actually the skin or neutralizing the a cover; performed upon the material being contaminants to which the employee (iii) Receptacles are provided in processed (point of operation) or where may be exposed; and numbers, sizes and locations that an associated danger zone exists during (ii) If the facility uses soap and water, encourage their use; and an operating cycle. it is supplied with clean, single-use (iv) Each receptacle is emptied as Note to paragraph (a)(2(ii): Exception. hand towels stored in a sanitary often as necessary to prevent it from Minor tool changes and adjustments, and container and a sanitary means for overfilling and in a manner that does other minor servicing activities, which take

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72515

place during normal production operations, of this section shall utilize a tagout equipment or system has no potential for are not covered by this standard if they are system. stored or residual energy or reaccumulation routine, repetitive, and integral to the use of (ii) If an energy isolating device is of stored energy after shut down that could the machine, equipment or system for capable of being locked out, the endanger employees; (2) the machine, production, provided that the work is employer’s energy control program equipment or system has a single energy performed using alternative measures which source which can be readily identified and provide effective protection (See subpart O of under paragraph (b)(1) of this section isolated; (3) the isolation and locking out of 29 CFR part 1910). shall utilize lockout, unless the that energy source will completely employer can demonstrate that the deenergize and deactivate the machine, (iii) This standard does not apply to utilization of a tagout system will equipment or system; (4) the machine, the following: provide full employee protection as set equipment or system is isolated from that (A) Work on cord and plug connected forth in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. energy source and locked out during electric machines or equipment (iii) After [Insert Date 90 Days After servicing or maintenance; (5) a single lockout provided that energization or start up is Publication of a Final Rule in the device will achieve a locked-out condition; controlled by the unplugging of the Federal Register], whenever (6) the lockout device is under the exclusive machines or equipment from the energy replacement or major repair, renovation control of the authorized employee source and by the plug being under the or modification of a machine, performing the servicing or maintenance; (7) the servicing or maintenance does not create exclusive control of the employee equipment or system is performed, and hazards for other employees; and (8) the performing the servicing or whenever a new machine, equipment or employer, in utilizing this exception, has had maintenance; system is installed, the employer shall no accidents involving the activation or (B) Hot tap operations involving ensure that energy isolating devices for reenergization of the machine, equipment or transmission and distribution systems the machine, equipment or system are system during servicing or maintenance. designed to accept a lockout device. for substances such as gas, steam, water (ii) Each procedure shall clearly and This requirement does not apply to a or petroleum products when they are specifically outline the scope, purpose, machine, equipment or system that is performed on pressurized pipelines, authorization, rules and techniques to part of a vessel or vessel section the provided that the employer be utilized for the control of hazardous shipyard employer does not own. demonstrates that continuity of service energy and the means to enforce is essential; shutdown is impractical; (3) Full employee protection. (i) When a tagout device is used on an energy compliance including, but not limited and documented procedures are to, the following: followed, and special equipment is used isolating device that is capable of being locked out, the tagout device shall be (A) A specific statement of the that will provide proven effective intended use of the procedure; protection for employees; and attached at the same location that the lockout device would have been (B) Specific procedural steps for (C) The servicing and maintenance of shutting down, isolating, blocking and machines, equipment and systems attached, and the employer shall demonstrate that the tagout program securing machines, equipment or onboard vessels that are used for systems to control hazardous energy; inherently general industry operations will provide a level of safety equivalent to that obtained by using a lockout (C) Specific procedural steps for the such as fish processing. placement, removal and transfer of (3) Purpose. (i) This section requires program. (ii) In demonstrating that a level of lockout devices or tagout devices and employers to establish a program and safety is achieved in the tagout program the responsibility for them; and utilize procedures for affixing that is equivalent to the level of safety (D) Specific requirements for testing a appropriate lockout devices or tagout obtained by using a lockout program, machine, equipment or system to devices to energy isolating devices and the employer shall demonstrate full determine and verify the effectiveness of to otherwise disable machines, compliance with all tagout-related lockout devices, tagout devices and equipment or systems to prevent provisions of this standard together with other energy control measures. energization, start up or release of stored such additional elements as are (5) Protective materials and hardware. energy in order to prevent injury to necessary to provide the equivalent (i) Locks, tags, chains, wedges, key employees. safety available from the use of a blocks, adapter pins, self-locking (ii) When other standards in this part lockout device. Additional means to be fasteners, or other hardware shall be or applicable standards in part 1910 considered as part of the demonstration provided by the employer for isolating, require the use of lockout or tagout, they of full employee protection shall securing or blocking of machines, shall be used and supplemented by the include the implementation of equipment or systems from energy procedural and training requirements of additional safety measures, such as the sources. this section. removal of an isolating circuit element, (ii) Lockout devices and tagout (b) General—(1) Energy control blocking of a controlling switch, devices shall be singularly identified; program. The employer shall establish a opening of an extra disconnecting shall be the only devices(s) used for program consisting of energy control device, or the removal of a valve handle controlling energy; shall not be used for procedures, employee training and to reduce the likelihood of inadvertent other purposes; and shall meet the periodic inspections to ensure that energization. following requirements: before any employee performs any (4) Energy control procedures. (i) (A) Durable. (1) Lockout and tagout servicing or maintenance where the Procedures shall be developed, devices shall be capable of withstanding energizing, startup or release of stored documented and utilized for the control the environment to which they are energy could occur and cause injury, the of potentially hazardous energy when exposed for the maximum period of machine, equipment or system shall be employees are engaged in the activities time that exposure is expected. isolated from the energy source and covered by this section. (2) Tagout devices shall be rendered inoperative. constructed and printed so that Note to paragraph (b)(4)(i): Exception. The (2) Lockout/tagout. (i) If an energy employer need not document the required exposure to weather conditions or wet isolating device is not capable of being procedure for a particular machine, and damp locations will not cause the locked out, the employer’s energy equipment or system when all of the tag to deteriorate or the message on the control program under paragraph (b)(1) following elements exist: (1) The machine, tag to become illegible.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72516 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

(3) Tags shall not deteriorate when (ii) The employer shall certify that the cannot be inadvertently or accidentally used in corrosive environments such as periodic inspections have been detached during use. areas where acid and alkali chemicals performed. The certification shall (iii) Employee retraining. (A) are handled and stored. identify the machine, equipment or Retraining shall be provided for all (B) Standardized. Lockout and tagout system on which the energy control authorized and affected employees devices shall be standardized within the procedure was being utilized, the date whenever there is a change in their job facility in at least one of the following of the inspection, the employees assignments; a change in machines, criteria: Color; shape; or size; and included in the inspection and the equipment, systems or processes that additionally, in the case of tagout person performing the inspection. present a new hazard; or when there is devices, print and format shall be (7) Training and communication. (i) a change in the energy control standardized. General. The employer shall provide procedures. (C) Substantial—(1) Lockout devices. training to ensure that the purpose and (B) Additional retraining shall also be Lockout devices shall be substantial function of the energy control program conducted whenever a periodic enough to prevent removal without the are understood by employees and that inspection under paragraph (b)(6) of this use of excessive force or unusual the knowledge and skills required for section reveals, or whenever the techniques, such as with the use of bolt the safe application, usage and removal employer has reason to believe, that cutters or other metal cutting tools. of the energy controls are acquired by there are deviations from or (2) Tagout devices. Tagout devices, employees. The training shall include inadequacies in the employee’s including their means of attachment, the following: knowledge or use of the energy control shall be substantial enough to prevent (A) Each authorized employee shall procedures. inadvertent or accidental removal. receive training in the recognition of (C) The retraining shall reestablish Tagout device attachment means shall applicable hazardous energy sources, employee proficiency and introduce be of a non-reusable type, attachable by the type and magnitude of the energy new or revised control methods and hand, self-locking and non-releasable available in the workplace and the procedures, as necessary. with a minimum unlocking strength of methods and means necessary for (iv) Certification. The employer shall no less than 50 pounds and having the energy isolation and control. certify that employee training has been general design and basic characteristics (B) Each affected employee shall be accomplished and is being kept up to of being at least equivalent to a one- instructed in the purpose and use of the date. The certification shall contain piece, all environment-tolerant nylon energy control procedure. each employee’s name and dates of cable tie. (C) Each affected employee and all training. (8) Energy isolation. Lockout or tagout (D) Identifiable. Lockout devices and other employees whose work operations shall be performed only by the tagout devices shall indicate the identity are or may be in an area where energy authorized employees who are of the employee applying the device(s). control procedures may be utilized shall performing the servicing or (iii) Tagout devices shall warn against be instructed about the procedure and about the prohibition relating to maintenance. hazardous conditions if the machine, (9) Notification of employees. equipment or system is energized and attempts to restart or reenergize machines, equipment or system which Affected employees shall be notified by shall include a legend such as the the employer or authorized employee of following: Do Not Start; Do Not Open; are locked out or tagged out. (ii) Tagout System Training. When the application and removal of lockout Do Not Close; Do Not Energize; Do Not tagout systems are used, employees devices or tagout devices. Notification Operate. shall also be trained in the following shall be given before the controls are (6) Periodic Inspection. (i) The limitations of tags: applied and after they are removed from employer shall conduct a periodic (A) Tags are essentially warning the machine, equipment or system. inspection of each energy control devices affixed to energy isolating (c) Application of control. The procedure at least annually to ensure devices and do not provide the physical established procedures for the that the procedures and the restraint on those devices that is application of energy control (the requirements of this standard are being provided by a lock; lockout or tagout procedures) shall followed and to correct any deficiencies. (B) When a tag is attached to an cover the following elements and (A) The periodic inspection shall be energy isolating means, it is not to be actions and shall be done in the performed by an authorized employee removed without authorization of the following sequence: other than the employees(s) utilizing the authorized person responsible for it and (1) Preparation for shutdown. Before energy control procedure being it is never to be bypassed, ignored, or an authorized or affected employee inspected. otherwise defeated; turns off a machine, equipment or (B) Where lockout is used for energy (C) Tags must be legible and system, the authorized employee shall control, the periodic inspection shall understandable by all authorized have knowledge of the type and include a review between the inspector employees, affected employees and all magnitude of the energy, the hazards of and each authorized employee of that other employees whose work operations the energy to be controlled and the employee’s responsibilities under the are or may be in the area; method or means to control the energy. energy control procedure being (D) Tags and their means of (2) Machine, equipment or system inspected. attachment must be made of materials shutdown. The machine, equipment or (C) Where tagout is used for energy which will withstand the environmental system shall be turned off or shut down control, the periodic inspection shall conditions encountered in the using the procedures established for the include a review between the inspector workplace; machine, equipment or system. An and each authorized and affected (E) Tags may evoke a false sense of orderly shutdown must be utilized to employee of that employee’s security and their meaning needs to be avoid any additional or increased responsibilities under the energy control understood as part of the overall energy hazard(s) to employees as a result of the procedure being inspected and the control program; and equipment stoppage. elements set forth in paragraph (b)(7)(ii) (F) Tags must be securely attached to (3) Machine, equipment or system of this section. energy isolating devices so that they isolation. All energy isolating devices

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72517

that are needed to control the energy to (2) Employees. (i) The work area shall activities covered by the scope and the machine, equipment or system shall be checked to ensure that all employees application of this standard, the on-site be physically located and operated in have been safely positioned or removed. employer and the outside employer such a manner as to isolate the machine, (ii) After lockout or tagout devices shall inform each other of their equipment or system from the energy have been removed and before a respective lockout or tagout procedures. source(s). machine, equipment or system is (ii) The on-site employer shall ensure (4) Lockout or tagout device started, affected employees shall be that his/her employees understand and application. (i) Lockout or tagout notified that the lockout or tagout comply with the restrictions and devices shall be affixed to each energy device(s) have been removed. prohibitions of the outside employer’s isolating device by authorized (3) Lockout or tagout devices removal. energy control program. employees. Each lockout or tagout device shall be (3) Group lockout or tagout. (i) When (ii) Lockout devices, where used, shall removed from each energy isolating servicing and/or maintenance is be affixed in a manner that will hold the device by the employee who applied the performed by a crew, craft, department energy isolating devices in a ‘‘safe’’ or device. or other group, they shall utilize a ‘‘off’’ position. Note to paragraph (d)(3): Exception. When procedure which affords the employees (iii) Tagout devices, where used, shall the authorized employee who applied the a level of protection equivalent to that be affixed in such a manner as will lockout or tagout device is not available to provided by the implementation of a clearly indicate that the operation or remove it, that device may be removed under personal lockout or tagout device. the direction of the employer, provided that movement of energy isolating devices (ii) Group lockout or tagout devices specific procedures and training for such shall be used in accordance with the from the ‘‘safe’’ or ‘‘off’’ position is removal have been developed, documented prohibited. and incorporated into the employer’s energy procedures required by paragraph (b)(4) (A) Where tagout devices are used control program. The employer shall of this section including, but not with energy isolating devices designed demonstrate that the specific procedure necessarily limited to, the following with the capability of being locked, the provides equivalent safety to the removal of specific requirements: tag attachment shall be fastened at the the device by the authorized employee who (A) Primary responsibility is vested in same point at which the lock would applied it. The specific procedure shall an authorized employee for a set include at least the following elements: number of employees working under the have been attached. (i) Verification by the employer that the (B) Where a tag cannot be affixed protection of a group lockout or tagout authorized employee who applied the device device (such as an operations lock); directly to the energy isolating device, is not at the facility; the tag shall be located as close as safely (ii) Making all reasonable efforts to contact (B) Provision for the authorized possible to the device, in a position that the authorized employee to inform he or she employee to ascertain the exposure will be immediately obvious to anyone that his or her lockout or tagout device has status of individual group members attempting to operate the device. been removed; and with regard to the lockout or tagout of (iii) Ensuring that the authorized employee the machine, equipment or system; (5) Stored energy. (i) Following the has this knowledge before he/she resumes (C) When more than one crew, craft, application of lockout or tagout devices work at that facility. to energy isolating devices, all department, etc., is involved, potentially hazardous stored or residual (e) Additional requirements—(1) assignment of overall job-associated energy shall be relieved, disconnected, Testing or positioning of machines, lockout or tagout control responsibility restrained and otherwise rendered safe. equipment, systems, or their to an authorized employee designated to components. In situations in which coordinate affected work forces and (ii) If there is a possibility of lockout or tagout devices must be ensure continuity of protection; and reaccumulation of stored energy to a temporarily removed from the energy (D) Each authorized employee shall hazardous level, verification of isolation isolating device and the machine, affix a personal lockout or tagout device shall be continued until the servicing or equipment or system energized to test or to the group lockout device, group maintenance is completed, or until the position it, the following sequence of lockbox, or comparable mechanism possibility of such accumulation no actions shall be followed: when he or she begins work and shall longer exists. (i) Clear the machine, equipment, or remove those devices when he or she (6) Verification of isolation. Prior to system of tools and materials in stops working on the machine, starting work on machines, equipment accordance with paragraph (d)(1) of this equipment or system being serviced or or system that have been locked out or section; maintained. tagged out, the authorized employee (ii) Remove employees from the (4) Shift or personnel changes. shall verify that isolation and machine, equipment or system area in Specific procedures shall be utilized deenergization of the machine, accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this during shift or personnel changes to equipment or system have been section; ensure the continuity of lockout or accomplished. (iii) Remove the lockout or tagout tagout protection, including provision (d) Release from lockout or tagout. devices as specified in paragraph (d)(3) for the orderly transfer of lockout or Before lockout or tagout devices are of this section; tagout device protection between off- removed and energy is restored to the (iv) Energize and proceed with testing going and oncoming employees, to machine, equipment or system, or positioning; and minimize exposure to hazards from the procedures shall be followed and (v) Deenergize all systems and reapply energization or start-up of the machine, actions taken by the authorized energy control measures in accordance equipment or system, or the release of employee(s) to ensure the following: with paragraph (c) of this section to stored energy. (1) The machine, equipment or continue the servicing and/or Note to § 1915.89: The following appendix system. The work area shall be maintenance. A to § 1915.89 serves as a non-mandatory inspected to ensure that nonessential (2) Outside personnel (contractors, guideline to assist employers and employees items have been removed and to ensure ship’s crew, etc.). (i) Whenever outside in complying with the requirements of this that machine, equipment or system servicing personnel such as contractors section, as well as to provide other helpful components are operationally intact. or ship’s crew are to be engaged in information. Nothing in the appendix adds to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72518 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

or detracts from any of the requirements of Type(s) and location(s) of energy isolating § 1915.92 Retention of DOT markings, this section. devices. placards and labels. (5) Lock out the energy isolating device(s) (a) Any employer who receives a Appendix A to § 1915.89, Typical with assigned individual lock(s). package of hazardous material that is Minimal Lockout Procedures (6) Stored or residual energy (such as that required to be marked, labeled, or in capacitors, springs, elevated machine placarded in accordance with the U.S. General members, rotating flywheels, hydraulic Department of Transportation Lockout Procedure systems and air, gas, steam, or water pressure, etc.) must be dissipated or Hazardous Materials Regulations shall Lockout Procedure for restrained by methods such as grounding, retain those markings, labels and lllllllllllllllllllll repositioning, blocking, bleeding down, etc. placards on the package until the (Name of Company for single procedure or lllllllllllllllllllll packaging is sufficiently cleaned of identification of machine, equipment or Type(s) of stored energy—methods to residue and purged of vapors to remove system, if multiple procedures are used). dissipate or restrain. any potential hazards. Purpose (7) Ensure that the machine, equipment or (b) Any employer who receives a This procedure establishes the minimum system is disconnected from the energy freight container, rail freight car, motor requirements for the lockout of energy source(s) by first checking that no personnel vehicle, or transport vehicle that is isolating devices whenever maintenance or are exposed, then verify the isolation of the required to be marked or placarded in servicing is done on machines, equipment or machine, equipment or system by operating accordance with the U.S. Department of systems. It shall be used to ensure that the the push button or other normal operating Transportation Hazardous Materials machine, equipment or system is stopped, control(s) or by testing to make certain it will Regulations shall retain those markings isolated from all potentially hazardous not operate. and placards on the freight container, energy sources and locked out before CAUTION: Return operating control(s) to neutral or ‘‘off’’ position after verifying the rail freight car, motor vehicle, or employees perform any servicing or transport vehicle until the hazardous maintenance where the energization or start- isolation of the machine, equipment or materials are sufficiently removed to up of the machine, equipment or system or system. release of stored energy could cause injury. lllllllllllllllllllll prevent any potential hazards. Method of verifying the isolation of the (c) The employer shall maintain Compliance With This Program machine, equipment or system. markings, placards and labels in a All employees are required to comply with (8) The machine, equipment or system is manner that ensures that they are the restrictions and limitations imposed now locked out. readily visible. upon them during the use of lockout. The Restoring Machine, Equipment or System (d) For non-bulk packages that will authorized employees are required to to Service. When the servicing or not be reshipped, the requirements of perform the lockout in accordance with this maintenance is completed and the machine, this section are met if a label or other procedure. All employees, upon observing a equipment or system is ready to return to acceptable marking is affixed in machine, equipment, or system that is locked normal operating condition, the following accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200 out to perform servicing or maintenance shall steps shall be taken. Hazard Communication. not attempt to start, energize, or use that (1) Check the machine, equipment or machine, equipment or system. (e) For the purposes of this section, system and the immediate area around the the term ‘‘hazardous material’’ and any lllllllllllllllllllll machine to ensure that nonessential items Type of compliance enforcement to be have been removed and that the machine, other terms not defined in this section taken for violation of the above. equipment or system components are have the same definition as in the U.S. Department of Transportation Sequence of Lockout operationally intact. (2) Check the work area to ensure that all Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 (1) Notify all affected employees that employees have been safely positioned or CFR parts 171 through 180). servicing or maintenance is required on a removed from the area. machine, equipment or system and that it (3) Verify that the controls are in neutral. § 1915.93 Motor vehicle safety equipment, must be shut down and locked out to perform (4) Remove the lockout devices and operation and maintenance. the servicing or maintenance. reenergize the machine, equipment or (a) Application. (1) This section lllllllllllllllllllll system. applies to any vehicle used to transport Name(s)/Job Title(s) of affected employees Note: The removal of some forms of employees, materials, or property at and how to notify. blocking may require reenergization of the shipyards. This section does not apply (2) The authorized employee shall refer to machine, equipment or system before safe to motor vehicle operation on public the company procedure to identify the type removal. and magnitude of the energy that the streets and highways. machine, equipment or system utilizes, shall (5) Notify affected employees that the (2) The requirements of this section understand the hazards of the energy and servicing or maintenance is completed and apply to employer provided motor shall know the methods to control the the machine, equipment or system is ready vehicles. The requirements of energy. for use. paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(4) and (c)(2) of this lllllllllllllllllllll § 1915.90 Safety color code for marking section also apply to employee provided Type(s) and magnitude(s) of energy, its physical hazards. motor vehicles. hazards and the methods to control the (3) Only the requirements of energy. The requirements applicable to paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) apply to (3) If the machine, equipment or system is shipyard employment under this section powered industrial trucks, as defined in operating, shut it down by the normal are identical to those set forth at § 1910.178. The maintenance, stopping procedure (depress the stop button, § 1910.144 of this chapter. inspection, operation and training open switch, close valve, etc.). requirements in 29 CFR 1910.178 lllllllllllllllllllll § 1915.91 Accident prevention signs and continue to apply to powered industrial Type(s) and location(s) of machine, tags. equipment or system operating controls. trucks used for shipyard employment. (4) De-activate the energy isolating The requirements applicable to (b) Motor vehicle safety equipment. device(s) so that the machine, equipment or shipyard employment under this section (1) The employer shall ensure that each system is isolated from the energy source(s). are identical to those set forth at motor vehicle acquired or initially used lllllllllllllllllllll § 1910.145 of this chapter. after February 19, 2008 is equipped with

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72519

a safety belt for each employee which servicing or maintenance is being the advice or consultation this subpart operating or riding in the motor vehicle. performed under lockout or tagout, or requires. This requirement does not apply to any whose job requires work in an area in Hot tap. A procedure used in the motor vehicle that was not equipped which such servicing or maintenance is repair, maintenance and services with safety belts at the time of being performed. activities which involves welding on a manufacture. Authorized employee. A person who piece of equipment (pipelines, vessels (2) The employer shall ensure that locks out or tags out machines, or tanks) under pressure, in order to each employee uses the safety belt, equipment, or systems in order to install connections or appurtenances. It securely and tightly fastened, at all perform servicing or maintenance. An is commonly used to replace or add times while operating or riding in a affected employee becomes an sections of pipeline without the motor vehicle. authorized employee when that interruption of service for air, gas, (3) The employer shall ensure that employee’s duties include performing water, steam and petrochemical vehicle safety equipment is not removed servicing or maintenance covered under distribution systems. from any employer-provided vehicle. this section. Lockout. The placement of a lockout The employer shall replace safety Capable of being locked out. An device on an energy isolating device, in equipment that is removed. energy isolating device is capable of accordance with an established (4) The employer shall ensure that being locked out if it has a hasp or other procedure, ensuring that the energy each motor vehicle used to transport an means of attachment to which, or isolating device and the equipment employee has firmly secured seats that through which, a lock can be affixed, or being controlled cannot be operated are adequate for each employee being it has a locking mechanism built into it. until the lockout device is removed. transported and shall ensure that all Other energy isolating devices are Lockout device. A device that utilizes employees who are being transported capable of being locked out, if lockout a positive means such as a lock, either are using seats. can be achieved without the need to key or combination type, to hold an (c) Motor vehicle maintenance and dismantle, rebuild, or replace the energy energy isolating device in the safe operation. (1) The employer shall isolating device or permanently alter its position and prevent energization or ensure that each motor vehicle is energy control capability. startup. Included are blank flanges and maintained in a serviceable and safe Energized. Connected to an energy bolted slip blinds. operating condition and removed from source or containing residual or stored Motor vehicle. Any motor-driven service if it is not in such condition. energy. vehicle operated by an employee that is (2) The employer shall ensure that Energy isolating device. A mechanical used to transport employees, material, before a motor vehicle is operated, any device that physically prevents the or property. For the purposes of this tools and materials being transported transmission or release of energy, subpart, motor vehicles include are secured if their movements may including but not limited to the passenger cars, light trucks, vans, create a hazard for employees. following: manually operated electrical motorcycles, all-terrain-vehicles, (3) The employer shall implement circuit breaker; a disconnect switch; a powered industrial trucks and other measures to ensure that motor vehicle manually operated switch by which the similar vehicles. Motor vehicle does not operators are able to see and avoid conductors of a circuit can be include boats or vehicles operated injuring pedestrians and bicyclists at disconnected from all ungrounded exclusively on a rail or rails. shipyards. Measures that employers supply conductors and, in addition, no Normal production operations. The may implement to comply with this pole can be operated independently; a utilization of a machine, equipment or requirement include: line valve; a block; and any similar system to perform its intended (i) Establishing dedicated travel lanes device used to block or isolate energy. production function. Portable toilet facility. A non-sewered for motor vehicles, bicyclists and Push buttons, selector switches and facility for collecting and containing pedestrians; other control circuit type devices are not (ii) Installing crosswalks and traffic energy isolating devices. urine and feces. A portable toilet facility control devices such as stop signs or Energy source. Any source of may be either flushable or non- physical barriers to separate travel electrical, mechanical, hydraulic, flushable. For purposes of this section, lanes; pneumatic, chemical, thermal, or other portable toilet facilities do not include (iii) Providing reflective vests or other energy. privies. Potable water. Water that meets the gear so pedestrians and bicyclists are Hazardous or toxic substances. standards for drinking purposes of the clearly visible to motor vehicle Hazardous or toxic substances mean: state or local authority having operators; and (1) Any substance regulated by jurisdiction, or water that meets the (iv) Ensuring that bicycles have subpart Z of part 1915; quality standards prescribed by the U.S. reflectors, lights or other equipment to (2) Any material listed in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s maximize visibility of the bicyclist. Depart of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR parts 171 National Primary Water Regulations (40 § 1915.94 Servicing multi-piece and single through 180); CFR part 141). piece rim wheels. (3) Any atmosphere with an oxygen Sanitation facilities. Facilities, The requirements applicable to content of less than 19.5%; including supplies, maintained for shipyard employment under this section (4) Any corrosive substance; or employee personal and health needs are identical to those set forth at 29 CFR (5) Any environmental contaminant such as potable drinking water, toilet 1910.177. that may expose employees to injury, facilities, handwashing and drying illness or disease. facilities, showers (including quick § 1915.95 Definitions. Health care professional. A physician drenching/flushing) and changing The following definitions are or any other health care provider whose rooms, food preparation and eating applicable to this subpart: legally permitted scope of practice areas, first aid stations and on-site Affected employee. An employee allows the provider to independently medical service areas. Sanitation whose job requires operation or use of provide or be delegated the supplies include soap, waterless a machine, equipment or system on responsibility to provide some or all of cleaning agents, single-use drinking

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2 72520 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

cups, drinking water containers, toilet vehicle such as safety belts, airbags, Tagout), indicating that employees are paper and towels. headlights, tail lights, emergency hazard working on the systems. The lock or tag Serviceable condition. The state or lights, windshield wipers, brakes, horn, shall not be removed or the valves ability of a tool, machine, vehicle, or mirrors, windshields and other unblanked until it is determined that other device, to operate as it was windows and locks. this may be done without creating a intended by the manufacturer to Vermin. Includes insects, birds and hazard to the employees working on the operate. other animals, such as rodents and feral system, or until the work on the system Servicing and/or maintenance. cats, which may create safety and health is completed. Where valves are welded Workplace activities such as hazards for employees. instead of bolted, at least two isolation constructing, installing, setting up, Walking and working surfaces. Any and shutoff valves connecting the dead adjusting, inspecting, modifying, surface on or through which employees system with the live system or systems repairing, maintaining and servicing gain access to or perform job tasks. shall be secured, locked, or tagged, in machines, equipment or systems. These Walking and working surfaces also accordance with § 1915.89. include any surface upon or through activities include lubricating, cleaning, * * * * * unjamming and making adjustments or which employees are required or 10. In § 1915.164, paragraph (a)(2) is tool changes. allowed to walk or work in the Setting up. Any work performed to workplace. Walking and working revised to read as follows: prepare a machine, equipment or system surfaces include, but are not limited to, § 1915.164 Ship’s propulsion machinery. to perform its normal production work areas, accessways, aisles, exits, (a) * * * operation. gangways, ladders, ramps, stairs, steps Sewered toilet facility. A fixture and walkways. (1) * * * maintained for the purpose of urination (2) If the jacking gear is steam driven, and defecation that is connected to a Subpart J—[Amended] the employer shall ensure that the stop valves to the jacking gear are secured sanitary sewer, septic tank, holding tank 8. In § 1915.162, paragraph (a)(1) is and locked or tagged in accordance with (bilge), or on-site sewage disposal revised as follows: treatment facility and that is flushed § 1915.89 Control of Hazardous Energy with water. § 1915.162 Ship’s boilers. (Lockout/Tagout). Ship’s systems. Machines, equipment (a) * * * (3) If the jacking gear is electrically and systems that are a permanent or (1) The employer shall ensure that the driven, the employer shall ensure that inherent part of a vessel. Such systems isolation and shutoff valves connecting the circuit controlling the jacking gear is include, but are not limited to, systems the dead boiler with the live system or deenergized by tripping the circuit that ensure the vessel’s operational systems are secured, blanked and locked breaker, opening the switch or removing capability, such as propulsion, or tagged, in accordance with § 1915.89 the fuse, whichever is appropriate and navigation, radar, electrical, water, Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout/ locked or tagged in accordance with steering, ballast, structural systems and Tagout), indicating that employees are § 1915.89. systems to care for the crew. Ship’s working on the boiler. This lock or tag systems do not include inherently shall not be removed nor the valves Subpart l—[Amended] general industry operations onboard unblanked until it is determined that 11. In § 1915.181, paragraph (c) is vessels such as fish processing this may be done without creating a revised to read as follows: equipment. hazard to the employees working on the Tagout. The placement of a tagout boiler, or until the work on the boiler is § 1915.181 Electrical circuits and device on an energy isolating device, in completed. Where valves are welded distribution boards. accordance with an established instead of bolted, at least two isolation * * * * * procedure, to indicate that the energy and shutoff valves connecting the dead (c) The employer shall ensure that isolating device and the equipment boiler with the live system or systems deenergizing the circuit is accomplished being controlled may not be operated shall be secured and locked or tagged, by opening the circuit breaker, opening until the tagout device is removed. in accordance with § 1915.89 Control of the switch, or removing the fuse, Tagout device. A prominent warning Hazardous Energy (Lockout/Tagout). whichever method is appropriate. The device, such as a tag and a means of * * * * * circuit breaker, switch, or fuse location attachment, which can be securely 9. In § 1915.163, paragraph (a)(1) is shall be locked out or tagged in fastened to an energy isolating device in revised to read as follows: accordance with § 1915.89 Control of accordance with an established Hazardous Energy (Lockout/Tagout). procedure, to indicate that the energy § 1915.163 Ship’s Piping Systems. Such locks or tags shall not be removed isolating device and the equipment (a) * * * nor the circuit energized until it is being controlled may not be operated (1) The employer shall ensure that the determined definitely that the work on until the tagout device is removed. isolation and shutoff valves connecting Vehicle safety equipment. Those the dead system with the live system or the circuit has been completed. systems and devices installed on a systems are secured, blanked and locked * * * * * motor vehicle for the purposes of or tagged, in accordance with § 1915.89 [FR Doc. E7–24073 Filed 12–19–07; 8:45 am] effecting the safe operation of the Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout/ BILLING CODE 4510–26–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:13 Dec 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP2.SGM 20DEP2 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2