“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.” (Edmund Burke, 1729-1797)

Beginning December 6, 2012 and ending February 4, 2013, we have a small window of opportunity to improve the system by letting OSHA know of any construction standards that are out of date, duplicative or inconsistent.

OSHA is requesting assistance from the public, including employers, employees, and employee representatives involved in the construction industry, to submit recommendations for revisions to or removal of existing construction standards, including the rationale for these recommendations. The Agency is targeting primarily construction standards that are confusing or outdated, or that duplicate, or are inconsistent with other OSHA standards or the standards issued by other agencies.

Recommendations should be made on how to revise or remove those standards while maintaining or enhancing employee protection. It is hoped that by improving these standards it will lead to a better understanding by employers of their obligations, leading to increased compliance, improved employee safety and health, and reduced compliance costs. While commenters may recommend extensive revisions to, or major reorganizations of, OSHA standards, recommendations that require large-scale revisions to standards are not appropriate for this rulemaking. The Agency will determine whether such large-scale revisions are appropriate for a separate, future rulemaking. In addition, while the Standards Improvement Project – Phase IV (SIP-IV) will focus primarily on construction standards, the Agency will consider recommendations for improvements to non-construction standards.

History

In 1995, in response to a Presidential memorandum to improve government regulation, OSHA began a series of rulemakings designed to revise or remove standards that were confusing, outdated, duplicative, or inconsistent. In the first rulemaking, known as ‘‘Standards Improvement Project, Phase I’’ (SIP-I), OSHA focused on revising standards that were out of date, duplicative, or inconsistent. OSHA published the final SIP-I rule on June 18, 1998 (63 FR 33450). Two additional rounds of SIP rulemaking followed, with final SIP rules published in 2005 (SIP-II) and 2011 (SIP-III).

Recognizing the importance of public participation in the SIP process, the Agency believes that the SIP rulemaking process is an effective means to improve its standards.

Example Recommendations

Following are a few examples of prior recommendations as well as existing standards currently under review for possible inclusion in the SIP-IV rulemaking:

A. Eliminate Unnecessary Paperwork

  1. Examples from prior SIP rulemakings. SIP-III removed the duty of employers to transfer employee exposure and medical records to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) when an employer ceased doing business and left no successor, when the required period for retaining the records expired, or when the employer terminated a worker’s employment. While the original purpose of this requirement was to provide NIOSH with useful research information, NIOSH determined that it could not use these records for that purpose. SIP-III also removed the requirement to certify personal protective equipment (PPE) training. OSHA concluded that it could obtain the PPE training information using other means, thereby making this requirement unnecessary; removing the requirement reduced substantially the paperwork burden on employers.
  2. Example of an existing standard currently under review for possible inclusion in the SIP-IV rulemaking. To eliminate unnecessary paperwork among construction employers, OSHA is considering eliminating the requirement for a written certification of employee training in § 1926.503(b) of the construction Fall Protection standard (29 CFR part 1926, subpart M). The underlying training requirement would still apply, but employers would no longer have to prepare written certifications of the training.

B. Miscellaneous Revisions

  1. Examples from prior SIP rulemakings. SIP-III removed the word ‘‘hot’’ modifying ‘‘air hand dryers’’ in its Bloodborne Pathogens standard to allow the use of new high-velocity-air hand-drying machines. OSHA acknowledged in the SIP–III rulemaking that the new hand-drying technology was as effective as the requirements in the existing standard, but the existing standard limited hand drying to a decades-old technology that delivered only hot air.
  2. Examples of existing standards currently under review for possible inclusion in the SIP-IV rulemaking. With regard to the Underground Construction, Caissons, Cofferdams and Compressed Air standards (29 CFR part 1926, subpart S), OSHA is considering updating the decompression tables in Appendix A.6 This action would permit employers to use decompression procedures that take advantage of new hyperbaric technologies used widely by private-sector and public-sector employers in the U.S. engaged in extreme hyperbaric exposures. Currently, to use updated decompression procedures, employers engaged in tunneling projects, for example, must apply for a variance from the decompression tables currently specified by Appendix A. However, the variance process is not an efficient means of addressing health and safety issues that may affect multiple employers.

Submitting Recommendations

When submitting a recommended revision to an existing OSHA standard in response to this RFI, OSHA requests that members of the public explain their rationale and provide, if possible, data and information to support their comments. Specifically, OSHA is requesting commenters to provide: (1) The reasons why they believe a candidate standard is confusing or outdated, or duplicates, or is inconsistent with, other OSHA standards or the standards issued by other agencies, and mention specifically what the other standard is, and (2) the action, including revised language when appropriate, that they believe will improve the standard.

  1. Submit comments and additional material by February 4, 2013.
  2. All submissions must bear a postmark or provide other evidence of the submission date.
  3. Submit comments and additional material using any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile (FAX): Commenters may fax submissions, including any attachments, that are no longer than 10 pages in length to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648; OSHA does not require hard copies of these documents. Commenters must submit lengthy attachments that supplement these documents (e.g., studies, journal articles) to the OSHA Docket Office, Technical Data Center, Room N–2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210. These attachments must clearly identify the commenter’s name, date, subject, and docket number (i.e., OSHA-2012-0007) so the Agency can attach them to the appropriate comments.
    3. Regular mail, express mail, hand (courier) delivery, or messenger service. Submit a copy of comments and any additional material (e.g., studies, journal articles) to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2012-0007, Technical Data Center, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: 202-693-2350 (TDY number: 877-889-5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security procedures concerning delivery of materials by express mail, hand delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    4. All submissions received must include the Agency name and the docket number for this rulemaking (i.e., OSHA-2012-0007). OSHA places all submissions, including any personal information provided, in the public docket without change; this information will be available online at http:// www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters about submitting information they do not want made available to the public, or submitting comments that contain personal information (either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, and medical data.

Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the docket, go to http:// www.regulations.gov, or contact the OSHA Docket Office at the address listed above. While the Agency lists all documents in the docket in the http:// www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through this Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are accessible at the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket submissions.

Total Environmental & Safety (www.TotalEnviron.com) offers a comprehensive range of professional services necessary to meet your EHS regulatory compliance needs. If you’re unsure what you need to achieve EHS regulatory compliance or where to begin, contact Ralph Carito at contact@totalenviron.com to schedule a free consultation to discuss your company’s specific EHS regulatory requirements, your existing EHS regulatory compliance status, and approaches to identify regulatory gaps and areas of opportunities. The information gathered during our discussion will be used to create a plan of action, that once implemented, will strengthen your company’s EHS regulatory compliance posture and reduce future costs associated with noncompliance, such as regulatory fines, cleanup costs, lost work days, insurance premiums and claims, and legal costs stemming from civil and criminal liabilities. The action plan can be designed to meet your budget and timeline requirements.