You are on page 1of 70


December 20, 2007

Part II

Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health

29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1915

General Working Conditions in Shipyard
Employment; Proposed Rule
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 VIII. Unfunded Mandates
29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1915 may be made available online at http:// IX. OMB Review under the Paperwork
[Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006–0675 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
information on submitting comments, XIII. The Proposed Standard
General Working Conditions in
plus additional information on the References and Exhibits
Shipyard Employment
rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Participation’’ heading in the In this Federal Register notice, OSHA
Administration (OSHA), Labor. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of references documents in Docket No.
this document. OSHA-S049–2006–0675 (formerly
ACTION: Proposed rule.
OSHA Docket No. S–049) as well as
Docket: To read or download
SUMMARY: OSHA proposes to revise the documents in the following OSHA
comments and materials submitted in
standards on general working rulemakings and advisory committee
response to this Federal Register notice,
conditions in shipyard employment. proceedings, which OSHA is
go to Docket No. OSHA-S049–2006–
The proposed revisions would update incorporating by reference into the
0675 at or the
existing requirements to reflect docket of this rulemaking:
OSHA Docket Office at the address
advances in industry practices and • The proceedings of the Shipyard
above. All comments and submissions
technology. The proposal also would Employment Standards Advisory
in response to this Federal Register
cross reference general industry Committee (SESAC) (Docket Nos.
notice are listed in the http://
standards either that are already SESAC–1988 through SESAC–1993); index; however, some • The proceedings of the Maritime
applicable to shipyard employment or information (e.g., copyrighted material)
that OSHA intends to apply. Finally, Advisory Committee for Occupational
is not publicly available to read or Safety and Health (Docket Nos.
OSHA proposes to add provisions that download through the Web page. All
would provide protection from hazards MACOSH–1995 through MACOSH–
comments and submissions, including 2005);
not addressed by existing standards, 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 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, 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 OSHA-S049–2006–0675 (which is
electronic submissions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available at
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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72453 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
sanitation and medical services and first Injuries and illnesses. To estimate the
enclosed spaces below deck, on number of shipyard injuries and
aid. scaffolds and on busy and crowded
OSHA also proposes to add new illnesses, OSHA used the BLS annual
docks filled with equipment and
requirements to subpart F to protect survey of employers, which produces
material. The safe coordination of these
employees from hazardous working statistical estimates of occupational
work activities is also complicated by
conditions not currently addressed by injuries and illnesses by industry and
the fact that most shipyards are multi-
subpart F. These proposed additions specific characteristics (
employer worksites where shipyard
include the control of hazardous energy From 1992–2002, BLS data show that
employees, ship’s crew, contractors and
(lockout/tagout), safe operation and the occupational injury and illness rate
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).


Lost workday Percentage of Percentage of
Injury and illness (LWD) injury and LWD cases LWD cases
Median days
Industry rate per 100 full- illness rate per involving more involving more
away from work
time employees 100 full-time than 5 days than 30 days
employees away from work away from work
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 recognize hazardous energy sources and
control of hazardous energy. Exposure
480-volt distribution center was fatally know the specific means and
to hazardous energy has resulted in
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 indication whether the employee was
improve the chances that injured
motor vehicle safety provisions could checked on during or at the end of his
shipyard employees will survive if an
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.
requirement (proposed § 1915.93(b)(1) shipyard industry. A review of the IMIS
Finally, a shipyard employee was
and (2)) could have prevented the death database for 1987–2002 indicates that as
working on an accommodation ladder
of a shipyard employee who was many as 13 fatalities involving cardiac
on the MV Cape Henry at Pier 27 in San
operating a mobile crane to lift metal or respiratory arrest may have been
Francisco. It is presumed that he fell off
plates from a floating dock. The prevented had the proposed first aid
the ladder or the vessel into the water.
employee was killed when the crane provisions been in place.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
America and the American Waterways IV. Summary and Explanation of the
Labor to issue and enforce occupational
Shipyard Conference requested that Proposed Standard
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
Marking Physical Hazards). Finally, the section numbers in subpart F would be
standard (§ 1915.97) does not address
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:


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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
existing requirement that employers are employees (SESAC 1992–3, Ex. 104X, p.
117). Section 1915.82—Lighting
responsible to provide any waterproof
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
carrying capacity of the conductors. • In 1998, a five-man crew was
from working in those areas, and if not,
Paragraph (d) Heat Lamps—Proposed working on a barge, refitting it for use
to take immediate action to locate the
paragraph (d) would require that all heat on the Panama Canal. One of the
missing employee to render first aid or
lamps, including the face, be equipped employees was working alone on the
any other needed assistance. OSHA
with surround-type guards to prevent port side of the vessel installing the
added this provision after reviewing
contact with the bulb, which could pilot house when he fell into the water.
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.
• In 1995, an employee was working provision may not prevent every fatality
infrared heat lamps and does not fully
alone as a shipyard dock watchman associated with confined spaces and
address contact hazards since it does
when he apparently fell from the isolated work areas, but the Agency
not require that the lamp face be
gangway between the ship and the dock believes it will help to increase
guarded. OSHA believes these changes
wall to the bottom of the dry dock. The survivability when an accident or injury
are necessary because shipyards use a
unconscious employee was not found occurs.
variety of heat lamps and because fires
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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,
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
employers maximum flexibility in nationally recognized first aid
[T]he employer would pick employees to
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
the specific content of the required first organizations, if any, conduct the first
OSHA requests comment on the
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72473
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
72474 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72475
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
72476 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72477
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
72478 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72479
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


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
72480 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2



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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 Minimum number of
Number of employees
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.
10 to 24 ..................... 2.
clarifies that this requirement applies to 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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,
(§ 1910.1030(d)(2)(iii) and (iv)). proposal to allow the optional use of
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)?
Paragraph (j) Vermin control—OSHA shipyards, why OSHA is proposing to
most often in conjunction with portable
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 and 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
Second, the proposal is needed cover qualified persons working on a
rendered safe. The proposed provisions
because the comprehensive general vessel’s permanently installed electrical
for stored energy may have prevented
industry lockout/tagout standard system.
this fatality.
• 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
servicing could have been prevented if about hazardous energy in shipyard
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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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


Source/standard Means Second Layers of Number of Deenergization Required to Employee Written Periodic

required to isolation isolation isolations verification check energy training procedure inspection
secure energy required when required under required? at point of required? required? required?

VerDate Aug<31>2005
isolating device tagout device employee work?
used? ‘‘control’’ *

§ 1910.147** General In- Lockout Program ............... Lock ................ Not Applicable 1 ..................... 1 ..................... Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes.
dustry lockout tagout.
Tagout Program ................ Tag ................. Usually ........... Usually 2 ........ 0 Or 1 ............. Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes.
Part 1910 Subpart S ........................................... Tag ................. Yes ................. 2 ..................... 1 ..................... Yes ................. Yes ................. Yes ................. No ................... No.

19:13 Dec 19, 2007

§ 1915.162 Ship’s Boilers Bolted Valves .................... Tag ................. Yes ................. 2 ..................... 1 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.
Welded Valves .................. Lock & Tag ..... Yes ................. 2 ..................... 2 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.
§ 1915.163 Ship’s Piping ........................................... Tag ................. Yes ................. 2 ..................... 2 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.

Jkt 214001
§ 1915.164 Ships’ Propul- Steam ................................ Lock & Tag ..... Yes ................. 1 ..................... 1 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.
sion Machinery.
Electrical Breaker .............. Tag ................. Yes ................. 1 ..................... 1 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.
Electrical Fuse .................. Tag ................. Yes ................. 2 ..................... 1 ..................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No ................... No.
§ 1915.181 Subpart L ........................................... Tag ................. Yes ................. 1 ..................... 2 ..................... Yes ................. Yes ................. No ................... No ................... No.

PO 00000
Electrical Machinery.

* Employee ‘‘control’’ means either a lock or an employee-made isolation layer.

** Only § 1910.147, which exempts maritime employment, requires a comprehensive lockout/tagout program.

Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 commercial vessels. Therefore, OSHA
implementing programs to control
prepare fresh, frozen and canned has authority to regulate hazardous
hazardous energy and applying lockout/
seafood. Generally, fish processing energy onboard commercial vessels.
tagout systems during servicing.
vessels perform the same operations and (OSHA notes that the Coast Guard has
In light of these incidents, OSHA
use the same types of equipment as issued a limited regulation on machine
proposes to change its existing policy on
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
them (Ex. 16–1). Some vessels, known proposes adding language to § 1915.89
personnel being inured while working
as catcher/processors, also catch the and § 1910.147 specifying that:
around the moving gears, belts, and
seafood they process (Exs.16–1 through • Proposed § 1915.89 applies to the
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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:
part 1915 applies whenever ship’s crew reference of Parts 1915, 1916, 1917,
1918 * * * are not intended to include [A]n occupational safety and health
performs ship repairing operations. That standard must give an employer fair warning
said, OSHA is including the issue in the discussion in those parts of the
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 and unambiguous standards is upon the
under which the ‘established Federal
related employment,’’ some language in Secretary. The test is not what he might
standards’ were initially adopted’’ (37
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 The Dravo court concluded that if
when the Agency consolidated the ship
activities or employees. Specifically, OSHA intends a different coverage
repairing, shipbuilding and
§ 1915.4(d) states: scheme, the Agency must amend part
shipbreaking standards into part 1915
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 proposed § 1915.89. Specifically,
master to repair any vessel under 18 net tons.
approach OSHA delineated in
§ 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.’’)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
traditionally used the term as shorthand performed, machinery and equipment effective; and
for the employment covered by parts must be turned off and disconnected • Servicing or maintaining machines,
from the energy source, the energy- equipment or systems onboard vessels
1915, 1917 and 1918. To eliminate
isolating device must be either locked or that are inherently general industry
possible confusion, OSHA proposes in
tagged out, and the deenergization must operations. This would include
§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(B) to replace the
be verified. operations such as fish processing
shorthand term with reference to the
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 (proposed § 1915.89(a)(2)(ii)). Although
the unexpected energization or start up
§ 1910.147(a)(1)(ii)(B): OSHA recognizes that machines and
of the machines or equipment, or release
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 equipment are used to perform their
is part of a general overhaul and repair of the
adopting this scope and application
with a few changes. The proposal does usual production function), the scope of
entire vessel, part 1915 applies.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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,
any part of his or her body in contact the following elements: in utilizing this exception, has had no
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 system during servicing or
equipment; or
shut down, isolate, block, and secure maintenance.
• The employee is required to place equipment;
any part of his or her body into a danger Energy-isolating devices (locks and
• The steps designating the tags) (§ 1910.147(c)(2) and (3), proposed
zone associated with the operating cycle 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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:
this requirement would only apply to environments; and • 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
energy-isolating device, both lockout the effectiveness of lockout/tagout
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
locked out or tagged out. (4) Apply lockout or tagout devices to
Furthermore, the procedure must
As mentioned, when a tagout system energy isolating device in a manner that
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
devices affixed to energy isolating • Reasonable efforts have been made
(tagout). Where a tag cannot be affixed
devices and do not provide the physical to contact the authorized employee to
directly to the energy isolating device,
restraint of a lock; inform him or her that the device has
the standard requires that it must be
• When a tag is attached to an energy been removed; and
placed as close as safely possible to the
isolating device, it is not to be removed • Assurance that the absent
device, and in a position that will be
without authorization of the authorized authorized employee knows about the
immediately obvious to anyone
person responsible for it, and it is never removal before he or she returns and
attempting to operate the device or
to be bypassed, ignored or otherwise resumes work.
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:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 word ‘‘systems’’ to the ‘‘machines and
fatality occurred aboard a grain-carrying
proposing to apply the general industry equipment’’ the general industry
ship that was equipped with wing tanks
lockout/tagout standard to shipyards in standard covers. The hazards on vessels
on each side of the ship. A screw
the same manner as it applies to general often involve working on ship’s systems
conveyor ran through each wing tank.
industry. However, in certain places that create and distribute power—not
At the time of the accident, two of the
OSHA is proposing to modify the only the machines or equipment that are
wing tanks were being washed.
language of the standard to make the driven by it. There are several reasons
Simultaneously, a Marine Chemist and
rule more directly applicable to for explicitly identifying systems in the
a shipyard employee were inside
shipyard employment. Most of the application of the shipyard standard.
another wing tank that was not being
proposed modifications are strictly First, the language of shipbuilding and
washed. The shipyard employee was
technical, for example, changes in the repair revolves around systems. The
standing on the conveyor when it was
effective date and references to functional components of a ship are
turned on by a member of the ship’s
applicable standards in Part 1915. A few commonly known as ship’s systems,
crew who was unaware the employee
proposed changes address specific such as electrical, propulsion, guidance,
and the chemist were inside the other
working conditions and circumstances fuel, or radar systems. Adding systems
wing tank. The screw conveyor crushed
in shipyards. to the standard makes it more directly
the shipyard employee to death. • ‘‘Unexpected.’’ The proposal does
Although a lockout procedure was in applicable to shipyard employment, and
not include the term ‘‘unexpected,’’ makes it clear that the standard applies
effect for the employees washing the which the general industry Lockout/
tanks, this information was not to systems as a whole, not merely the
Tagout standard uses in describing individual components of such systems.
provided to the other employees, nor 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
supersede these regulations (Docket SESAC
§ 1910.213 Woodworking Machinery;
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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/
paragraph (d) of this section, the on-site
OSHA is requesting comment on what tagout program and submit a copy of it
employer and the outside employer shall
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
shipyards. The proposed language, being used.
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.
(ii) The on-site employer shall ensure that
employer to adopt the most protective 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
Section 1910.141(h)—OSHA is Preliminary Economic and Initial
requirement to be in serviceable
proposing not to retain the existing Regulatory Flexibility Screening
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
Establish- Production (1,000)
Size class Firms Employees
ments 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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).


Total annualized
Requirement costs

Handwashing Facilities ........................................................................................................................................................... $254,540
Medical Services and First Aid:
CPR Training .......................................................................................................................................................................... 136,442
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
benefits of $15.4 million annually. compliance forward to their customers).
forward to their customers, OSHA
When the costs of compliance are This corresponds to compliance costs as
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
(i.e., that employers will be able to pass less than 0.01 percent. Given the
benefits of the proposed standard equal
all of the costs of compliance forward to minimal potential impact on both prices
$14.4 million.
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.


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

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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.


Compliance cost
Per firm compli- Compliance cost
as a % of reve-
ance cost 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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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 U.S.C. 655(a)). The provisions in
Description and Proposed Use of the
estimated burden hours associated with subpart F were adopted from existing
Collection-of-Information Requirements
these collections including comment on Federal regulations promulgated under
the following: OSHA is proposing to revise and
Section 41 of the Longshore and Harbor
• Whether the proposed collection-of- update the existing standards in subpart
Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA)
information requirements are necessary F of 29 CFR part 1915 that address
(33 U.S.C. 941), as well as national
for the proper performance of the hazardous working conditions in
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.


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-

§ 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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

§ 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
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 72509


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
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 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. (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 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
Estimated Total Burden hours: encourage them to do so. The 26 States
those ICRS submitted for proposed
10,491. and Territories with OSHA-approved
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
72510 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

XI. Public Participation and/or http:// Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. It 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
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 to submit Signed at Washington, DC this 7th day of
your industry. OSHA will carefully 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.
electronically at http:// For the reasons set forth in the
Electronic copies of this Federal preamble, OSHA proposes to amend 29, which is the Register document are available at
Federal eRulemaking Portal; (2) by CFR parts 1910 and 1915 as follows: 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 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,
instead, you wish to mail additional 1. The authority citation for subpart J
interested parties may request an of 29 CFR part 1910 is revised to read
materials in reference to an electronic or informal public hearing. Hearing
fax submission, you must submit three as follows:
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 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–
(1) The hearing requests must include
71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83
electronic comments by name, date, and 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, (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 safety signs except those designed for
Register document are posted at 29 CFR Part 1915
streets, highways, and railroads. These (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. (OSHA Docket health, Reporting and recordkeeping
Nos. S–049, SESAC–1988 through * * * * *
requirements, and Vessels.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); walking and working surfaces.
(1) Scope.
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
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 (i) The employer shall ensure that
(48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 Subpart F—General Working
Conditions hoses and electrical service cords are
FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67
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
shipyard employment, regardless of cords.
5. In § 1910.177, paragraph (a)(2) is
geographic location, including work (j) The employer shall ensure that
revised to read as follows:
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. containers when not in use.
(a) * * *
(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.
Standards, 29 CFR part 1918, create a hazard for employees. The
employer shall ensure that these § 1915.82 Lighting.
Construction Safety Standards, 29 CFR
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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2


Lumens 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
72512 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules


Lumens 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 (d) Heat lamps. The employer shall
§ 1915.83 Utilities.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

(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
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
the eyes and body. The employer shall equipment (PPE) in compliance with the
lifeboat, either in a stowed or suspended
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. condition.
hoisting gear and that are capable of
(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
squads. (2) The employer shall clearly mark
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. In a similar fashion, employers who (A) The number of toilet facilities
(2) The employer shall ensure that the
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

(3) The employer shall inspect first circumstances. By assessing the specific provide separate toilet facilities for each
needs of their workplace, employers can
aid supplies at intervals that ensure 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
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.
condition and meet the requirements of (j) Vermin control. (1) To the extent
1 to 15 ....................... 1
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.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
performing the servicing or maintenance; (7)
source and by the plug being under the or modification of a machine,
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.
for substances such as gas, steam, water designed to accept a lockout device.
(ii) Each procedure shall clearly and
or petroleum products when they are This requirement does not apply to a
specifically outline the scope, purpose,
performed on pressurized pipelines, machine, equipment or system that is
authorization, rules and techniques to
provided that the employer part of a vessel or vessel section the
be utilized for the control of hazardous
demonstrates that continuity of service shipyard employer does not own.
(3) Full employee protection. (i) When energy and the means to enforce
is essential; shutdown is impractical; compliance including, but not limited
and documented procedures are a tagout device is used on an energy
isolating device that is capable of being to, the following:
followed, and special equipment is used (A) A specific statement of the
that will provide proven effective locked out, the tagout device shall be
attached at the same location that the intended use of the procedure;
protection for employees; and (B) Specific procedural steps for
(C) The servicing and maintenance of lockout device would have been
attached, and the employer shall shutting down, isolating, blocking and
machines, equipment and systems securing machines, equipment or
onboard vessels that are used for demonstrate that the tagout program
will provide a level of safety equivalent systems to control hazardous energy;
inherently general industry operations (C) Specific procedural steps for the
such as fish processing. to that obtained by using a lockout
program. placement, removal and transfer of
(3) Purpose. (i) This section requires lockout devices or tagout devices and
(ii) In demonstrating that a level of
employers to establish a program and the responsibility for them; and
safety is achieved in the tagout program
utilize procedures for affixing (D) Specific requirements for testing a
that is equivalent to the level of safety
appropriate lockout devices or tagout machine, equipment or system to
obtained by using a lockout program,
devices to energy isolating devices and determine and verify the effectiveness of
the employer shall demonstrate full
to otherwise disable machines, lockout devices, tagout devices and
compliance with all tagout-related
equipment or systems to prevent other energy control measures.
provisions of this standard together with
energization, start up or release of stored (5) Protective materials and hardware.
such additional elements as are
energy in order to prevent injury to (i) Locks, tags, chains, wedges, key
necessary to provide the equivalent
employees. blocks, adapter pins, self-locking
safety available from the use of a
(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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
other employees whose work operations (8) Energy isolation. Lockout or tagout
(D) Identifiable. Lockout devices and
are or may be in an area where energy shall be performed only by the
tagout devices shall indicate the identity
control procedures may be utilized shall authorized employees who are
of the employee applying the device(s).
be instructed about the procedure and performing the servicing or
(iii) Tagout devices shall warn against
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 devices or tagout devices. Notification
tagout systems are used, employees
Operate. shall be given before the controls are
shall also be trained in the following
(6) Periodic Inspection. (i) The applied and after they are removed from
limitations of tags:
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
remove it, that device may be removed under personal lockout or tagout device.
clearly indicate that the operation or
the direction of the employer, provided that (ii) Group lockout or tagout devices
movement of energy isolating devices specific procedures and training for such
from the ‘‘safe’’ or ‘‘off’’ position is shall be used in accordance with the
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
applied it. The specific procedure shall an authorized employee for a set
same point at which the lock would
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
directly to the energy isolating device, is not at the facility;
device (such as an operations lock);
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
application of lockout or tagout devices (C) When more than one crew, craft,
work at that facility. department, etc., is involved,
to energy isolating devices, all
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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
General placarded in accordance with the U.S.
members, rotating flywheels, hydraulic
systems and air, gas, steam, or water
Department of Transportation
Lockout Procedure Hazardous Materials Regulations shall
pressure, etc.) must be dissipated or
Lockout Procedure for retain those markings, labels and
restrained by methods such as grounding,
lllllllllllllllllllll placards on the package until the
repositioning, blocking, bleeding down, etc.
(Name of Company for single procedure or lllllllllllllllllllll packaging is sufficiently cleaned of
identification of machine, equipment or residue and purged of vapors to remove
Type(s) of stored energy—methods to
system, if multiple procedures are used). any potential hazards.
dissipate or restrain.
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
up of the machine, equipment or system or system. materials are sufficiently removed to
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 markings, placards and labels in a
machine, equipment or system.
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
out to perform servicing or maintenance shall
accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200
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
lllllllllllllllllllll the term ‘‘hazardous material’’ and any
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.
operationally intact. Department of Transportation
Sequence of Lockout Hazardous Materials Regulations (49
(2) Check the work area to ensure that all
(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. shipyards. This section does not apply
blocking may require reenergization of the
(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. streets and highways.
and magnitude of the energy that the
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 section also apply to employee provided
§ 1915.90 Safety color code for marking
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

open switch, close valve, etc.).

lllllllllllllllllllll requirements in 29 CFR 1910.178
§ 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
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.
Push buttons, selector switches and Portable toilet facility. A non-sewered
for motor vehicles, bicyclists and
other control circuit type devices are not facility for collecting and containing
(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.
Hazardous or toxic substances. Potable water. Water that meets the
gear so pedestrians and bicyclists are
Hazardous or toxic substances mean: standards for drinking purposes of the
clearly visible to motor vehicle
(1) Any substance regulated by state or local authority having
operators; and
subpart Z of part 1915; jurisdiction, or water that meets the
(iv) Ensuring that bicycles have
(2) Any material listed in the U.S. quality standards prescribed by the U.S.
reflectors, lights or other equipment to
Depart of Transportation Hazardous Environmental Protection Agency’s
maximize visibility of the bicyclist.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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
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.
activities include lubricating, cleaning, include any surface upon or through
* * * * *
unjamming and making adjustments or which employees are required or
allowed to walk or work in the 10. In § 1915.164, paragraph (a)(2) is
tool changes.
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,
gangways, ladders, ramps, stairs, steps (a) * * *
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
sanitary sewer, septic tank, holding tank valves to the jacking gear are secured
8. In § 1915.162, paragraph (a)(1) is
(bilge), or on-site sewage disposal and locked or tagged in accordance with
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
vessels such as fish processing 11. In § 1915.181, paragraph (c) is
this may be done without creating a
equipment. revised to read as follows:
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
§ 1915.163 Ship’s Piping Systems. Hazardous Energy (Lockout/Tagout).
procedure, to indicate that the energy
Such locks or tags shall not be removed
isolating device and the equipment (a) * * *
(1) The employer shall ensure that the nor the circuit energized until it is
being controlled may not be operated
isolation and shutoff valves connecting determined definitely that the work on
until the tagout device is removed.
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
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS2

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