Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses: Proposed Delay of Compliance Date, 29261-29263 [2017-13550]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
[FR Doc. 2017–13472 Filed 6–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
29 CFR Part 1904
[Docket No. OSHA–2013–0023]
RIN 1218–AD16
Improve Tracking of Workplace
Injuries and Illnesses: Proposed Delay
of Compliance Date
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; delay of
compliance date.
AGENCY:
On May 12, 2016, the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) published a
rule entitled ‘‘Improve Tracking of
Workplace Injuries and Illnesses’’ with
an effective date of January 1, 2017 for
the final rule’s electronic reporting
requirements. The final rule sets an
initial deadline of July 1, 2017, as the
date by which certain employers are
required to submit the information from
their completed 2016 Form 300A to
OSHA electronically. This action
proposes to extend the initial
submission deadline for 2016 Form
300A data to December 1, 2017, to
provide the new administration an
opportunity to review the new
electronic reporting requirements prior
to their implementation and allow
affected entities sufficient time to
familiarize themselves with the
electronic reporting system, which will
not be available until August 1. The
proposed five-month delay would be
effective on the date of publication of a
final rule in the Federal Register. OSHA
also intends to issue a separate proposal
to reconsider, revise, or remove other
provisions of the prior final rule. OSHA
will seek comment on those provisions
in that separate proposal. In this
proposal, OSHA only seeks comment on
the delay of the July 1, 2017 compliance
date to December 1, 2017.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted (postmarked, sent, or
received) by July 13, 2017.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments. You may submit
comments, identified by Docket No.
OSHA–2013–0023, by any of the
following methods:
Electronically: You may submit
comments and attachments
electronically at https://
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Jun 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
www.regulations.gov, which is the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow the
instructions online for making
electronic submissions. When
uploading multiple attachments into
Regulations.gov, please number all of
your attachments because
www.Regulations.gov will not
automatically number the attachments.
This will be very useful in identifying
all attachments in the rulemaking
docket. For example, Attachment 1—
title of your document, Attachment 2—
title of your document, Attachment 3—
title of your document, etc. Specific
instructions on uploading all documents
are found in the Facts, Answer,
Questions portion and the commenter
check list on the Regulations.gov Web
page.
Fax: If your submissions, including
attachments, are not longer than 10
pages, you may fax them to the OSHA
Docket Office at (202) 693–1648.
Mail, hand delivery, express mail,
messenger, or courier service: You may
submit your comments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA–2013–
0023, Room N–3653, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–2350 (TTY (887) 889–5627).
OSHA’s Docket Office accepts deliveries
(hand deliveries, express mail, and
messenger/courier service) from 10 a.m.
to 3 p.m. e.t., weekdays.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the Agency name and the
docket number for this rulemaking
(Docket No. OSHA–2013–0023). All
comments, including any personal
information you provide, are placed in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at: https://
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA
cautions you not to submit personal
information such as Social Security
numbers and birthdates.
Docket: To read or download
comments and materials submitted in
response to this Federal Register notice,
go to Docket No. OSHA–2013–0023 at
https://www.regulations.gov, or to the
OSHA Docket Office at the address
above. All comments and submissions
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index; however,
some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to
read or download through that Web site.
All comments and submissions are
available for inspection at the OSHA
Docket Office.
Electronic copies of this Federal
Register document are available at
https://www.regulations.gov. Copies also
are available from the OSHA Office of
Publications, Room N–3101, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29261
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone (202) 693–1888. This
document, as well as news releases and
other relevant information, is also
available at OSHA’s Web site at https://
www.osha.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
press inquiries: Frank Meilinger,
Director, Office of Communications,
Room N–3647, OSHA, U.S. Department
of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–1999; email meilinger.francis2@
dol.gov.
For general and technical
information: Miriam Schoenbaum,
OSHA, Office of Statistical Analysis,
Room N–3507, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–1841; email: schoenbaum.miriam@
dol.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On May 12, 2016, the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) published a rule entitled
‘‘Improve Tracking of Workplace
Injuries and Illnesses’’ with an effective
date of January 1, 2017, for the final
rule’s electronic reporting requirements
(81 FR 29624). Under these
requirements, certain employers who
were required to complete Form 300A
in 2016 must submit the information on
the form to OSHA electronically by July
1, 2017.
The Department proposes to delay the
initial deadline for electronic
submission of 2016 300A data from July
1, 2017, to December 1, 2017. The data
collection system was originally
intended to launch in February 2017.
This would have given employers four
months to submit their data in time for
the due date of July 1. However, the
launch was postponed. OSHA now
expects to launch the data collection
system by August 1, and the proposed
due date of December 1 will allow
OSHA to provide employers the same
four-month window to electronically
submit their 2016 Form 300A data. This
delay will also to provide the new
administration the opportunity to
review the new electronic reporting
requirements prior to their
implementation and allow affected
entities sufficient time to familiarize
themselves with the electronic reporting
system, which will not be available
until August 1. OSHA seeks comment
by July 13, 2017 on its proposal to
extend the submission deadline by five
months to December 1, 2017. OSHA also
intends to issue a separate proposal to
reconsider, revise, or remove other
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
29262
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
provisions of the prior final rule. OSHA
will seek comment on those provisions
in that separate proposal. In this
proposal, OSHA only seeks comment on
the delay of the July 1, 2017 compliance
date to December 1, 2017.
B. Preliminary Economic Analysis
OSHA is proposing to delay the
implementation of the electronic
reporting requirements of the Improve
Tracking of Workplace Injuries and
Illnesses rule by five months. By July 1,
2017, all establishments were to
electronically report their summary data
(Form 300A). The proposed new date
for reporting is December 1, 2017. The
cost savings for this delay are $59,310,
or $6,953 per year annualized at three
percent over the same 10-year period
OSHA used in the initial rulemaking. At
a 7 percent discount rate, the cost
savings of the proposed delay are
$134,689, or $19,177 per year
annualized over 10 years.
These cost savings are calculated as
follows. First, OSHA subtracted costs
not applicable to the proposed delay
from the original private-sector cost of
the final rule. The subtracted costs
include the costs of familiarization and
checking by unregulated establishments
(both of which would have taken place
after the rule was published in May
2016), the costs of the nondiscrimination provision (which became
enforceable in 2016), and the costs of
submission of case data (the OSHA Log
data) (which is not required until 2018).
This yields a private-sector cost of
$4,845,365 per year, for the parts of the
original rule relevant to the proposed
delay of the first year’s submission date
from July 1, 2017, to December 1, 2017.
This cost represents the cost of
electronically submitting the required
2016 information from the OSHA Form
300A in 2017. The affected employers
have already gathered and recorded this
information, as required by a different
section of Part 1904.
This proposed delay will only affect
costs for this year (2017); this proposal
does not affect the deadlines for
electronic submission in subsequent
years. Thus, the only cost savings
associated with this proposal are for
delaying the deadline for the electronic
submission of previously-recorded data
by five months, from July 1, 2017, to
December 1, 2017.
The cost savings of the delay are
estimated based on the interest that can
now be earned on the funds involved
while the report for the first year is
delayed.1 At a 3 percent discount rate,
1 The entire derivation is as follows: OSHA begins
with a current private sector cost of the original rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Jun 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
this results in a one-time cost savings of
$59,310, or $6,953 per year annualized
over 10 years. At a 7 percent discount
rate, this results in a one-time cost
savings of $134,689, or $19,177 per year
annualized over 10 years.
The Agency notes that it did not
include an overhead labor cost in the
Final Economic Analysis (FEA) for this
rule. It is important to note that there is
not one broadly accepted overhead rate
and that the use of overhead to estimate
the marginal costs of labor raises a
number of issues that should be
addressed before applying overhead
costs to analyze the costs of any specific
regulation. There are several approaches
to look at the cost elements that fit the
definition of overhead, and there are a
range of overhead estimates currently
used within the federal government—for
example, the Environmental Protection
Agency has used 17 percent,2 and
government contractors have been
reported to use an average of 77
percent.3 4 Some overhead costs, such as
advertising and marketing, may be more
closely correlated with output than with
labor. Other overhead costs vary with
the number of new employees. For
example, rent or payroll processing
costs may change little with the
addition of 1 employee in a 500employee firm, but may change
substantially with the addition of 100
employees. If an employer is able to
rearrange current employees’ duties to
implement a rule, then the marginal
share of overhead costs such as rent,
insurance, and major office equipment
(e.g., computers, printers, copiers)
would be very difficult to measure with
accuracy (e.g., computer use costs
associated with two hours for rule
familiarization by an existing
employee).
If OSHA had included an overhead
rate when estimating the marginal cost
of labor, without further analyzing an
appropriate quantitative adjustment,
of $4,845,365 times the discount rate value of the
delay of (1+d∧¥(5/12). OSHA then subtracts this
value (which is $4,786,055 at 3 percent) from the
full value of $4,845,365. This results in a difference
of $59,310, which can be annualized at 3 percent
as $6,953.
2 Cody Rice, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, ‘‘Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the
Toxics Release Inventory Program,’’ June 10, 2002.
3 Grant Thornton LLP, 2015 Government
Contractor Survey. (https://
www.grantthornton.com/∼/media/content-pagefiles/public-sector/pdfs/surveys/2015/GovContractor-Survey.ashx)
4 For further example of overhead cost estimates,
please see the Employee Benefits Security
Administration’s guidance at https://www.dol.gov/
sites/default/files/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/rulesand-regulations/technical-appendices/labor-costinputs-used-in-ebsa-opr-ria-and-pra-burdencalculations-august-2016.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and adopted for these purposes an
overhead rate of 17 percent on base
wages, as was done in a sensitivity
analysis in the FEA in support of
OSHA’s 2016 final rule on Occupational
Exposure to Respirable Crystalline
Silica, the base wages would increase
annualized cost savings by
approximately $1,822 per year using a 3
percent discount rate and by $3,260 a
year using a 7 percent discount rate.
(Note that all costs of this proposed rule
are labor costs.)
As noted below, OSHA has stated that
the data submission requirements of the
original final rule would lead employers
to increase workplace safety and health;
although the costs of the safety- and
health-improving actions have not been
quantified, the savings associated with a
delay of such costs would be analogous
to those calculated for quantified costs.
Table 1 summarizes the annualized
and one-time cost savings.
TABLE 1—ANNUALIZED AND ONE-TIME
COST SAVINGS 5
Cost
savings
method
3 Percent
Discount
Rate .......
7 Percent
Discount
Rate .......
Annualized
savings
One time cost
savings
$6,953
$59,310
19,177
134,689
OSHA did not quantify the benefits of
the final rule. In the economic analysis
of the final rule, OSHA stated that the
rule would improve OSHA’s ability to
identify, target, and remove safety and
health hazards, thereby preventing
workplace injuries, illnesses, and
deaths. In addition, OSHA stated that
the data submission requirements of the
final rule would improve the quality of
the information submitted and lead
employers to increase workplace safety
and health. OSHA also projected
benefits associated with making the data
publicly available. OSHA does not
believe this relatively brief delay in
initial submissions would have any
effect on these benefits; however,
because of the lack of quantification,
there is some uncertainty as to what the
impact will be. Other aspects of the final
rule that OSHA determined would
produce benefits, such as the nondiscrimination provision and the
collection of case characteristic data
(OSHA Forms 300, 301) from
establishments with 250 or more
5 All cost savings are in 2014 dollars. Costs are
annualized over ten years.
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
6 was developed by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council to
establish management measures and
2017 harvest limits for the blueline
tilefish fishery north of the Virginia/
North Carolina border. These changes
are intended to propose permanent
management measures for this fishery,
consistent with requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by NOAA–NMFS–2016–0025,
by either of the following methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA–NMFS–2016–
0025, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: John K. Bullard, Regional
Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic
Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great
Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
Mark the outside of the envelope:
‘‘Comments on Blueline Tilefish
Amendment.’’
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are part of the public record
and will generally be posted to
www.regulations.gov without change.
All personal identifying information
(e.g., name, address, etc.) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information.
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments. Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted via
Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats
only.
Copies of Amendment 6, and of the
draft Environmental Assessment and
preliminary Regulatory Impact Review
(EA/RIR), are available from the MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council,
800 North State Street, Suite 201, Dover,
DE 19901. The EA/RIR is also accessible
via the Internet at:
www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Douglas Potts, Fishery Policy Analyst,
978–281–9341.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
NMFS proposes regulations to
implement Amendment 6 to the Tilefish
Fishery Management Plan. Amendment
Background
This action proposes regulations to
implement Amendment 6 to the Tilefish
employees, would not be altered by this
proposed action.
This delay of five months is both
economically and technologically
feasible. The delay meets both criteria of
feasibility because the original rule was
economically and technologically
feasible without a five-month delay.
OSHA has considered whether this
proposed change will have a significant
economic impact on small firms. As a
result of these considerations, in
accordance with § 605 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, OSHA certifies that this
proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Thus, OSHA
did not prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis or conduct a
SBREFA Panel.
Consistent with EO 13771 (82 FR
9339, February 3, 2017), OSHA has
estimated the annualized cost savings
over 10 years for this proposed rule to
range from $6,953 to $19,177,
depending on the discount rate.
Therefore, this proposed rule, if
finalized, is expected to be an EO 13771
deregulatory action.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
does not propose changes to the
information collections already
approved by OMB under control
number 1218–0176.
Signed at Washington, DC, on June 22,
2017.
Dorothy Dougherty,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2017–13550 Filed 6–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 160229161–7558–01]
RIN 0648–BF86
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Amendment 6 to the Tilefish
Fishery Management Plan
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Jun 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29263
Fishery Management Plan (FMP). The
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council developed this amendment to
establish management measures for the
blueline tilefish fishery in Federal
waters north of the Virginia/North
Carolina border, consistent with the
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The
management measures contained in
Amendment 6 are summarized below,
with additional information and
analysis are provided in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) (see
ADDRESSES).
The blueline tilefish fishery in
Federal waters south of the Virginia/
North Carolina border is managed by the
South Atlantic Fishery Management
Council as part of its Snapper-Grouper
FMP. The fishery in the Mid-Atlantic
has historically been minor and not
subject to Federal management. In 2014,
a closure of the blueline tilefish fishery
in the South Atlantic resulted in a
significant increase in commercial
fishing effort in the Mid-Atlantic region
and a 20-fold increase in blueline
tilefish landings. At the request of the
Mid-Atlantic Council, we implemented
emergency management measures in
June 2015 (80 FR 31864; June 4, 2015),
to control harvest of blueline tilefish
and reduce the risk of overfishing on
this stock. The emergency measures
were extended (80 FR 74712; November
30, 2015) to give the Council time to
develop long-term management
measures through Amendment 6. As
work on Amendment 6 continued, we
implemented additional interim
measures (81 FR 39591; June 17, 2016)
to control harvest during the peak
fishing season in the summer and fall of
2016. Those interim measures expired
December 14, 2016. Although
management measures in Mid-Atlantic
Federal waters lapsed, harvest of
blueline tilefish in this region is still
restricted by regulations implemented
by several Mid-Atlantic states.
Amendment 6 proposes to establish
mechanisms and measures to ensure
ongoing and consistent management of
the blueline tilefish fishery in Federal
waters north of the Virginia/North
Carolina border.
Proposed Management Unit, FMP
Objectives, Status Determination
Criteria
We are proposing the Council’s
recommendation of a management unit
for blueline tilefish encompassing the
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
from the North Carolina/Virginia border
(36.550278 N Latitude) extending north
to the maritime boundary with Canada.
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 28, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29261-29263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13550]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Part 1904
[Docket No. OSHA-2013-0023]
RIN 1218-AD16
Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses: Proposed
Delay of Compliance Date
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Department of
Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; delay of compliance date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 12, 2016, the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) published a rule entitled ``Improve Tracking of
Workplace Injuries and Illnesses'' with an effective date of January 1,
2017 for the final rule's electronic reporting requirements. The final
rule sets an initial deadline of July 1, 2017, as the date by which
certain employers are required to submit the information from their
completed 2016 Form 300A to OSHA electronically. This action proposes
to extend the initial submission deadline for 2016 Form 300A data to
December 1, 2017, to provide the new administration an opportunity to
review the new electronic reporting requirements prior to their
implementation and allow affected entities sufficient time to
familiarize themselves with the electronic reporting system, which will
not be available until August 1. The proposed five-month delay would be
effective on the date of publication of a final rule in the Federal
Register. OSHA also intends to issue a separate proposal to reconsider,
revise, or remove other provisions of the prior final rule. OSHA will
seek comment on those provisions in that separate proposal. In this
proposal, OSHA only seeks comment on the delay of the July 1, 2017
compliance date to December 1, 2017.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or
received) by July 13, 2017.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments. You may submit comments, identified by Docket No.
OSHA-2013-0023, by any of the following methods:
Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for making electronic
submissions. When uploading multiple attachments into Regulations.gov,
please number all of your attachments because www.Regulations.gov will
not automatically number the attachments. This will be very useful in
identifying all attachments in the rulemaking docket. For example,
Attachment 1_title of your document, Attachment 2_title of your
document, Attachment 3_title of your document, etc. Specific
instructions on uploading all documents are found in the Facts, Answer,
Questions portion and the commenter check list on the Regulations.gov
Web page.
Fax: If your submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
You may submit your comments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No.
OSHA-2013-0023, Room N-3653, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-2350 (TTY (887)
889-5627). OSHA's Docket Office accepts deliveries (hand deliveries,
express mail, and messenger/courier service) from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
e.t., weekdays.
Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2013-0023). All
comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at:
https://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions you not to submit
personal information such as Social Security numbers and birthdates.
Docket: To read or download comments and materials submitted in
response to this Federal Register notice, go to Docket No. OSHA-2013-
0023 at https://www.regulations.gov, or to the OSHA Docket Office at the
address above. All comments and submissions are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through that
Web site. All comments and submissions are available for inspection at
the OSHA Docket Office.
Electronic copies of this Federal Register document are available
at https://www.regulations.gov. Copies also are available from the OSHA
Office of Publications, Room N-3101, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
1888. This document, as well as news releases and other relevant
information, is also available at OSHA's Web site at https://www.osha.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For press inquiries: Frank Meilinger,
Director, Office of Communications, Room N-3647, OSHA, U.S. Department
of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202) 693-1999; email meilinger.francis2@dol.gov.
For general and technical information: Miriam Schoenbaum, OSHA,
Office of Statistical Analysis, Room N-3507, U.S. Department of Labor,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
1841; email: schoenbaum.miriam@dol.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On May 12, 2016, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) published a rule entitled ``Improve Tracking of Workplace
Injuries and Illnesses'' with an effective date of January 1, 2017, for
the final rule's electronic reporting requirements (81 FR 29624). Under
these requirements, certain employers who were required to complete
Form 300A in 2016 must submit the information on the form to OSHA
electronically by July 1, 2017.
The Department proposes to delay the initial deadline for
electronic submission of 2016 300A data from July 1, 2017, to December
1, 2017. The data collection system was originally intended to launch
in February 2017. This would have given employers four months to submit
their data in time for the due date of July 1. However, the launch was
postponed. OSHA now expects to launch the data collection system by
August 1, and the proposed due date of December 1 will allow OSHA to
provide employers the same four-month window to electronically submit
their 2016 Form 300A data. This delay will also to provide the new
administration the opportunity to review the new electronic reporting
requirements prior to their implementation and allow affected entities
sufficient time to familiarize themselves with the electronic reporting
system, which will not be available until August 1. OSHA seeks comment
by July 13, 2017 on its proposal to extend the submission deadline by
five months to December 1, 2017. OSHA also intends to issue a separate
proposal to reconsider, revise, or remove other
[[Page 29262]]
provisions of the prior final rule. OSHA will seek comment on those
provisions in that separate proposal. In this proposal, OSHA only seeks
comment on the delay of the July 1, 2017 compliance date to December 1,
2017.
B. Preliminary Economic Analysis
OSHA is proposing to delay the implementation of the electronic
reporting requirements of the Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries
and Illnesses rule by five months. By July 1, 2017, all establishments
were to electronically report their summary data (Form 300A). The
proposed new date for reporting is December 1, 2017. The cost savings
for this delay are $59,310, or $6,953 per year annualized at three
percent over the same 10-year period OSHA used in the initial
rulemaking. At a 7 percent discount rate, the cost savings of the
proposed delay are $134,689, or $19,177 per year annualized over 10
years.
These cost savings are calculated as follows. First, OSHA
subtracted costs not applicable to the proposed delay from the original
private-sector cost of the final rule. The subtracted costs include the
costs of familiarization and checking by unregulated establishments
(both of which would have taken place after the rule was published in
May 2016), the costs of the non-discrimination provision (which became
enforceable in 2016), and the costs of submission of case data (the
OSHA Log data) (which is not required until 2018). This yields a
private-sector cost of $4,845,365 per year, for the parts of the
original rule relevant to the proposed delay of the first year's
submission date from July 1, 2017, to December 1, 2017.
This cost represents the cost of electronically submitting the
required 2016 information from the OSHA Form 300A in 2017. The affected
employers have already gathered and recorded this information, as
required by a different section of Part 1904.
This proposed delay will only affect costs for this year (2017);
this proposal does not affect the deadlines for electronic submission
in subsequent years. Thus, the only cost savings associated with this
proposal are for delaying the deadline for the electronic submission of
previously-recorded data by five months, from July 1, 2017, to December
1, 2017.
The cost savings of the delay are estimated based on the interest
that can now be earned on the funds involved while the report for the
first year is delayed.\1\ At a 3 percent discount rate, this results in
a one-time cost savings of $59,310, or $6,953 per year annualized over
10 years. At a 7 percent discount rate, this results in a one-time cost
savings of $134,689, or $19,177 per year annualized over 10 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The entire derivation is as follows: OSHA begins with a
current private sector cost of the original rule of $4,845,365 times
the discount rate value of the delay of (1+d[caret]-(5/12). OSHA
then subtracts this value (which is $4,786,055 at 3 percent) from
the full value of $4,845,365. This results in a difference of
$59,310, which can be annualized at 3 percent as $6,953.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency notes that it did not include an overhead labor cost in
the Final Economic Analysis (FEA) for this rule. It is important to
note that there is not one broadly accepted overhead rate and that the
use of overhead to estimate the marginal costs of labor raises a number
of issues that should be addressed before applying overhead costs to
analyze the costs of any specific regulation. There are several
approaches to look at the cost elements that fit the definition of
overhead, and there are a range of overhead estimates currently used
within the federal government--for example, the Environmental
Protection Agency has used 17 percent,\2\ and government contractors
have been reported to use an average of 77 percent.3 4 Some
overhead costs, such as advertising and marketing, may be more closely
correlated with output than with labor. Other overhead costs vary with
the number of new employees. For example, rent or payroll processing
costs may change little with the addition of 1 employee in a 500-
employee firm, but may change substantially with the addition of 100
employees. If an employer is able to rearrange current employees'
duties to implement a rule, then the marginal share of overhead costs
such as rent, insurance, and major office equipment (e.g., computers,
printers, copiers) would be very difficult to measure with accuracy
(e.g., computer use costs associated with two hours for rule
familiarization by an existing employee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Cody Rice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ``Wage
Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory
Program,'' June 10, 2002.
\3\ Grant Thornton LLP, 2015 Government Contractor Survey.
(https://www.grantthornton.com/~/media/content-page-files/public-
sector/pdfs/surveys/2015/Gov-Contractor-Survey.ashx)
\4\ For further example of overhead cost estimates, please see
the Employee Benefits Security Administration's guidance at https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/rules-and-regulations/technical-appendices/labor-cost-inputs-used-in-ebsa-opr-ria-and-pra-burden-calculations-august-2016.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If OSHA had included an overhead rate when estimating the marginal
cost of labor, without further analyzing an appropriate quantitative
adjustment, and adopted for these purposes an overhead rate of 17
percent on base wages, as was done in a sensitivity analysis in the FEA
in support of OSHA's 2016 final rule on Occupational Exposure to
Respirable Crystalline Silica, the base wages would increase annualized
cost savings by approximately $1,822 per year using a 3 percent
discount rate and by $3,260 a year using a 7 percent discount rate.
(Note that all costs of this proposed rule are labor costs.)
As noted below, OSHA has stated that the data submission
requirements of the original final rule would lead employers to
increase workplace safety and health; although the costs of the safety-
and health-improving actions have not been quantified, the savings
associated with a delay of such costs would be analogous to those
calculated for quantified costs.
Table 1 summarizes the annualized and one-time cost savings.
Table 1--Annualized and One-Time Cost Savings \5\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized One time cost
Cost savings method savings savings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Percent Discount Rate................. $6,953 $59,310
7 Percent Discount Rate................. 19,177 134,689
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ All cost savings are in 2014 dollars. Costs are annualized
over ten years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA did not quantify the benefits of the final rule. In the
economic analysis of the final rule, OSHA stated that the rule would
improve OSHA's ability to identify, target, and remove safety and
health hazards, thereby preventing workplace injuries, illnesses, and
deaths. In addition, OSHA stated that the data submission requirements
of the final rule would improve the quality of the information
submitted and lead employers to increase workplace safety and health.
OSHA also projected benefits associated with making the data publicly
available. OSHA does not believe this relatively brief delay in initial
submissions would have any effect on these benefits; however, because
of the lack of quantification, there is some uncertainty as to what the
impact will be. Other aspects of the final rule that OSHA determined
would produce benefits, such as the non-discrimination provision and
the collection of case characteristic data (OSHA Forms 300, 301) from
establishments with 250 or more
[[Page 29263]]
employees, would not be altered by this proposed action.
This delay of five months is both economically and technologically
feasible. The delay meets both criteria of feasibility because the
original rule was economically and technologically feasible without a
five-month delay.
OSHA has considered whether this proposed change will have a
significant economic impact on small firms. As a result of these
considerations, in accordance with Sec. 605 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, OSHA certifies that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Thus, OSHA did not prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis
or conduct a SBREFA Panel.
Consistent with EO 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), OSHA has
estimated the annualized cost savings over 10 years for this proposed
rule to range from $6,953 to $19,177, depending on the discount rate.
Therefore, this proposed rule, if finalized, is expected to be an EO
13771 deregulatory action.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking does not propose changes to the
information collections already approved by OMB under control number
1218-0176.
Signed at Washington, DC, on June 22, 2017.
Dorothy Dougherty,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2017-13550 Filed 6-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
