Injury and Illness Prevention Program, 23637-23640 [2010-10138]
Download as PDF
23637
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal
Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort
Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321–
7716.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis
supporting the views and suggestions
presented are particularly helpful in
developing reasoned regulatory
decisions on the proposal. Comments
are specifically invited on the overall
regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related
aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both
docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this notice must submit with those
comments a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to
Docket No. FAA–2010–0403/Airspace
Docket No. 10–ACE–4.’’ The postcard
will be date/time stamped and returned
to the commenter.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Availability of NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded through the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through
the FAA’s Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/
air_traffic/publications/
airspace_amendments/.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received and any final disposition in
person in the Dockets Office (see
ADDRESSES section for address and
phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. An informal docket
may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the
Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham
Blvd, Fort Worth, TX 76137.
Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future NPRM’s should
contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking
202–267–9677, to request a copy of
Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking Distribution
System, which describes the application
procedure.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 May 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
The Proposal
This action proposes to amend Title
14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class
E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface for SIAPs at
Perryville Municipal Airport, Perryville,
MO. Controlled airspace is needed for
the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
Class E airspace areas are published
in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and
effective September 15, 2009, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
71.1. The Class E airspace designation
listed in this document would be
published subsequently in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current. It,
therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant
rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1,
section 106 describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, part A, subpart
I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to assign the use of airspace
necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft
and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would add additional
controlled airspace at Perryville
Municipal Airport, Perryville, MO.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (Air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9T,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed August 27, 2009, and
effective September 15, 2009, is
amended as follows:
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more
above the surface of the earth.
*
*
*
*
*
ACE MO E5 Perryville, MO [Amended]
Perryville Municipal Airport, MO
(Lat. 37°52′07″ N., long. 89°51′44″ W.)
Farmington VORTAC, MO
(Lat. 37°40′24″ N., long. 90°14′03″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile
radius of Perryville Municipal Airport and
within 1.8 miles each side of the 057° radial
of the Farmington VORTAC extending from
the 6.6-mile radius to 8.2 miles southwest of
the airport, and within 3.9 miles each side of
the 197° bearing from the airport extending
from the 6.6-mile radius to 11 miles south of
the airport.
Issued in Fort Worth, TX on April 23,
2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO
Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010–10323 Filed 5–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
29 CFR Part 1910
Injury and Illness Prevention Program
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of stakeholder meetings.
SUMMARY: OSHA invites interested
parties to participate in informal
stakeholder meetings on Injury and
Illness Prevention Programs, referred to
as ‘‘I2P2.’’ OSHA plans to use the
information gathered at these meetings
in developing an Injury and Illness
Prevention Program proposed rule. The
discussions will be informal and will
provide the Agency with the necessary
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
23638
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
information to develop a rule that will
help employers reduce workplace
injuries and illnesses through a
systematic process that proactively
addresses workplace safety and health
hazards.
DATES: Dates and locations for the
stakeholder meetings are:
• June 3, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
in East Brunswick, NJ.
• June 10, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., in Dallas, TX.
• June 29, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., in Washington, DC.
The deadlines for confirmed
registration at each meeting are May 20,
May 27, and June 15, 2010 respectively.
ADDRESSES:
I. Registration
Submit your notice of intent to
participate in one of the scheduled
meetings by one of the following:
• Electronic. Register at https://
www2.ergweb.com/projects/
conferences/osha/register-oshaI2P2.htm (follow the instructions
online).
• Facsimile. Fax your request to:
(781) 674–2906, and label it ‘‘Attention:
OSHA I2P2 Stakeholder Meeting
Registration.’’
• Regular mail, express delivery,
hand (courier) delivery, and messenger
service.
Send your request to: Eastern Research
Group, Inc., 110 Hartwell Avenue,
Lexington, MA 02421; Attention: OSHA
I2P2 Stakeholder Meeting Registration.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Meetings
Specific information on the location
of each meeting can be found on the
I2P2 Web site at https://
www2.ergweb.com/projects/
conferences/osha/register-oshaI2P2.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
• Press inquiries. Contact Jennifer
Ashley, Director, OSHA Office of
Communications, Room N–3647, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone: (202) 693–1999.
• General and technical information.
Contact Michael Seymour, OSHA
Directorate of Standards and Guidance,
Room N–3718, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202)
693–1950.
• Copies of this Federal Register
notice. Electronic copies are available at
https://www.regulations.gov. This
Federal Register notice, as well as news
releases and other relevant information,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 May 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
also are available on the OSHA Web
page at https://www.osha.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Over the past 30 years, the
occupational safety and health
community has used various names to
describe systematic approaches to
reducing injuries and illnesses in the
workplace. OSHA has voluntary Safety
and Health Management Program
guidelines, consensus and international
standards use the term ‘‘Safety and
Health Management Systems,’’ and
OSHA’s state plan states use terms such
as ‘‘Injury and Illness Prevention
Programs’’ and ‘‘Accident Prevention
Programs.’’ In this notice, OSHA uses
the term ‘‘Injury and Illness Prevention
Programs.’’ Regardless of the title, the
common goal of these approaches is to
help employers reduce workplace
injuries and illnesses through a
systematic process that proactively
addresses workplace safety and health
hazards.
OSHA’s History With Safety and Health
Programs
The Occupational Safety and Health
Act (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) (the Act) in
Section 17, paragraph (j), provides the
Occupational Safety and Health Review
Commission (OSHRC) the authority to
assess civil penalties giving due
consideration to the good faith of the
employer. Based on this paragraph of
the Act, OSHA has also had a policy of
reducing penalties for employers who
have violated OSHA standards but who
have demonstrated a good faith effort to
provide a safe and healthy workplace to
their employees. The Agency has long
recognized the implementation of a
safety and health program as a way of
demonstrating good faith. Similarly, in
its first decision, the OSHRC held that
good faith compliance efforts are gauged
primarily by the presence of effective
safety and health programs (Nacirema
Operating Co., 1 O.S.H. Cas. (BNA) 1001
(Rev. Comm’n 1972)).
Over the years, OSHA has established
a number of initiatives to encourage
employers to develop and implement
employee safety and health programs.
OSHA’s Small Business Consultation
Program, which offers small businesses
with exemplary safety and health
programs an opportunity for recognition
under their Safety and Health
Achievement Recognition Program
(SHARP) and the Agency’s Voluntary
Protection Program (VPP) are two
examples of such initiatives. The
Agency established the VPP to recognize
companies in the private sector with
outstanding records in the area of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
employee safety and health. It became
apparent that many of these worksites,
which had higher levels of compliance,
fewer serious hazards, and injury and
illness rates markedly below industry
averages, were relying on safety and
health programs to produce these
results.
Based on the growing support for
safety and health programs, OSHA
issued the Safety and Health Program
Management Guidelines in 1989 (54 FR
3908). These guidelines reflect the best
management practices of successful
companies and encourage employers to
institute and maintain a program which
provides systematic policies,
procedures, and practices that are
adequate to recognize and protect their
employees from occupational safety and
health hazards. The guidelines identify
four major elements of an effective
program: Management commitment and
employee involvement; worksite
analysis; hazard prevention and
controls; and safety and health training.
OSHA’s Previous Rulemaking Effort
In October of 1995, OSHA held the
first series of stakeholder meetings to
discuss preliminary ideas for a safety
and health program rule and the
significant issues that would be raised
by such a rule. Many small businesses
and organizations representing small
businesses attended the stakeholder
meetings. Staff members from the Office
of Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA) were also present
at the stakeholder meetings.
In all, OSHA interacted with
hundreds of stakeholders, including
employers, employees, employee
representatives, trade associations, State
and local government personnel, safety
and health professionals, Advisory
Committees, and other interested
parties.
In 1998, OSHA developed a draft
proposed rule that would have required
employers in general industry and
maritime workplaces to establish safety
and health programs. The program in
the draft proposed rule had five core
elements, including: Management
leadership and employee participation;
hazard identification and assessment;
hazard prevention and control;
information and training; and
evaluation of the program’s
effectiveness. In developing the draft
proposed rule, OSHA worked
extensively with stakeholders from
labor, industry, safety and health
organizations, State governments, trade
associations, insurance companies, and
small businesses.
On October 20, 1998, OSHA convened
a Small Business Regulatory
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
Panel for the draft Safety and Health
Programs proposed rule. The Panel
provided small entity representatives
(SERs) with initial drafts of the rule, a
summary of the rule, the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, a
summary of the benefits and costs of the
rule as it affected firms in the small
entity representative’s industry, OSHA’s
draft enforcement policy for the rule,
and a list of issues of interest to panel
members.
The SBREFA Panel held
teleconferences and received written
comments from the SERs. The
comments, and the Panel’s responses to
them, formed the principal basis for the
Panel’s report. The Panel’s report
provided background information on
the draft proposed rule and the types of
small entities that would be subject to
the proposed rule, described the Panel’s
efforts to obtain the advice and
recommendations of representatives of
those small entities, summarized the
comments that had been received from
those representatives, and presented the
findings and recommendations of the
Panel.
A proposed Safety and Health
Program rule was never published, and
the rulemaking effort was removed from
the Regulatory Agenda on August 15,
2002. However, the effort in the 1990s
showed the interest of OSHA, the States,
employers, employees, OSHA’s advisory
committees, and others in a systematic
process that proactively addresses
workplace safety and health hazards. It
demonstrated that OSHA was not alone
in believing that these processes work to
save lives and to prevent injuries and
illnesses in the workplace.
Safety and Health Management System
Consensus Standards
Recently, consensus standards have
been developed that address safety and
health management systems. The
American Industrial Hygiene
Association published a voluntary
consensus standard, ANSI/AIHA Z10—
2005 Occupational Safety and Health
Management Systems, based on the
‘‘Plan-Do-Check-Act’’ cycle. The Z10
standard places an emphasis on
continual improvement and
systematically eliminating the
underlying root cause of hazards. In
addition, the Occupational Health and
Safety Assessment Series (OHSAS)
Project Group, which is an international
association of government agencies,
private industries, and consulting
organizations, developed OHSAS
18001—2007 Occupational Health and
Safety Management Systems in response
to customer demand for a recognized
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 May 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
occupational health and safety
management system standard against
which their management systems could
be assessed and certified. The OHSAS
18001 is published by the British
Standards Institute.
II. Stakeholder Meetings
Stakeholder meetings will provide
OSHA with current information and
appreciation of the views of a wide
range of interests. The meetings will be
conducted as a group discussion. To
facilitate as much group interaction as
possible, formal presentations will not
be permitted. OSHA believes the
stakeholder meeting discussion should
center on major issues such as:
• Possible regulatory approaches.
• Scope and application of a rule.
—Covered industries.
—Covered employers (size, high/low
injury rates).
—Covered hazards.
—Relationship to existing OSHA
requirements.
• Organization of a rule.
—Regulatory text.
—Mandatory or voluntary appendices.
—Other standards incorporated by
reference.
• The role of consensus standards.
• Economic impacts.
• Any additional topics as time
permits.
In addition, OSHA is interested in
receiving feedback on the following
specific questions:
• In light of the ANSI Z10 standard,
the OHSAS 18001 standard, and
OSHA’s 1989 guidelines, what are the
advantages and disadvantages of
addressing through rulemaking a
systematic process that proactively
addresses workplace safety and health
hazards?
• Based on OSHA’s experience, the
agency believes that an I2P2 rule would
include the following elements:
1. Management duties (including
items such as establishing a policy,
setting goals, planning and allocating
resources, and assigning and
communicating roles and
responsibilities);
2. Employee participation (including
items such as involving employees in
establishing, maintaining and evaluating
the program, employee access to safety
and health information, and employee
role in incident investigations);
3. Hazard identification and
assessment (including items such as
what hazards must be identified,
information gathering, workplace
inspections, incident investigations,
hazards associated with changes in the
workplace, emergency hazards, hazard
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
23639
assessment and prioritization, and
hazard identification tools);
4. Hazard prevention and control
(including items such as what hazards
must be controlled, hazard control
priorities, and the effectiveness of the
controls);
5. Education and training (including
items such as content of training,
relationship to other OSHA training
requirements, and periodic training);
and
6. Program evaluation and
improvement (including items such as
monitoring performance, correcting
program deficiencies, and improving
program performance).
Are these the appropriate elements?
Which elements are essential for an
effective approach? Should additional
elements be included?
• How can OSHA ensure that small
business employers are able to
implement and maintain an effective
I2P2?
• Should an OSHA I2P2 rule apply to
every business or should it be limited in
some way based on an employer’s size,
industry, incident rates, and/or hazard
indices?
• To what extent should OSHA rely
on existing consensus standards in
developing a rule?
• How can OSHA use state
experience with injury and illness
prevention in developing a rule?
• What mechanisms have been found
to be effective for enabling employees to
participate in safety and health in the
workplace?
• Given the variety of names used to
describe processes to reduce injuries
and illnesses in the workplace, what is
the most appropriate name for OSHA to
describe this topic?
III. Public Participation
Approximately 50 participants will be
accommodated in each meeting, and
eight hours will be allotted for each
meeting. Members of the general public
may observe, but not participate in, the
meetings on a first-come, first-served
basis as space permits. OSHA staff will
be present to take part in the
discussions. Logistics for the meetings
are being managed by Eastern Research
Group (ERG), which will provide a
facilitator and compile notes
summarizing the discussion; these notes
will not identify individual speakers.
ERG also will make an audio recording
of each session to ensure that the
summary notes are accurate; these
recordings will not be transcribed. The
summary notes will be available on
OSHA’s Web page at https://
www.osha.gov.
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
23640
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Specific information on the location
of each meeting can be found on the
I2P2 Web site at https://
www2.ergweb.com/projects/
conferences/osha/register-oshaI2P2.htm.
To participate in one of the
stakeholder meetings, or be a
nonparticipating observer, you may
submit notice of intent electronically, by
facsimile, or by hard copy. In order to
encourage as wide a range of viewpoints
as possible, OSHA will confirm
participants as necessary to ensure a fair
representation of interests and to
facilitate gathering diverse viewpoints.
To receive a confirmation of your
participation 1 week before the meeting,
register by the date listed in the DATES
section of this notice. However,
registration will remain open until the
meetings are full. Additional
nonparticipating observers that do not
register for the meeting will be
accommodated as space permits. See the
ADDRESSES section of this notice for the
registration Web site, facsimile number,
and address. To register electronically,
follow the instructions provided on the
Web site. To register by mail or
facsimile, please indicate the following:
• Name, address, phone, fax, and email.
• Meeting location you would like to
attend.
• Organization for which you work.
• Organization you represent (if
different).
• Stakeholder category: Government,
industry, standards-developing
organization, research or testing agency,
union, trade association, insurance,
consultant, or other (if other, please
specify).
• Industry sector (if applicable).
Electronic copies of this Federal
Register notice, as well as news releases
and other relevant documents, are
available on the OSHA Web page at:
https://www.osha.gov.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under
the direction of David Michaels, PhD,
MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.
Department of Labor, pursuant to
sections 4, 6, and 8 of the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.
653, 655, 657), 29 CFR part 1911, and
Secretary’s Order 5–2007 (72 FR 31160).
Signed at Washington, DC, on April 12,
2010.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2010–10138 Filed 5–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 May 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R02–OAR–2009–0462, FRL–9144–6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; New York
Reasonably Available Control
Technology and Reasonably Available
Control Measures
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: On August 25, 2009, the EPA
proposed to disapprove portions of a
proposed revision to the New York State
Implementation Plan, submitted on
February 8, 2008, that was intended to
meet specific Clean Air Act
requirements for attaining the 0.08 parts
per million 8-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standards.
Specifically, EPA proposed to
disapprove New York’s reasonably
available control measure analysis and
New York’s efforts to meet the
reasonably available control technology
requirements. Subsequent to that action,
New York passed two additional rules
and submitted them for review and
inclusion in the State Implementation
Plan and made additional commitments
to meet the remaining reasonably
available control technology and
reasonably available control measure
requirements. Therefore, in this action
EPA is proposing a conditional approval
of the reasonably available control
technology requirement which applies
to the entire State of New York,
including the New York portion of the
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY–NJ–CT and the
Poughkeepsie 8-hour ozone moderate
nonattainment areas. In addition, EPA is
proposing a conditional approval of the
reasonably available control measure
analysis which applies to the New York
portion of the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 8-hour
ozone moderate nonattainment area.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 3, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket Number EPA–R02–
OAR–2009–0462, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: Werner.Raymond@epa.gov.
• Fax: 212–637–3901.
• Mail: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air
Programs Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New
York 10007–1866.
• Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner,
Chief, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007–
1866. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office’s normal
hours of operation. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30
excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2009–0462.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters or any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 4, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23637-23640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10138]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Part 1910
Injury and Illness Prevention Program
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of stakeholder meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OSHA invites interested parties to participate in informal
stakeholder meetings on Injury and Illness Prevention Programs,
referred to as ``I2P2.'' OSHA plans to use the information gathered at
these meetings in developing an Injury and Illness Prevention Program
proposed rule. The discussions will be informal and will provide the
Agency with the necessary
[[Page 23638]]
information to develop a rule that will help employers reduce workplace
injuries and illnesses through a systematic process that proactively
addresses workplace safety and health hazards.
DATES: Dates and locations for the stakeholder meetings are:
June 3, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., in East Brunswick,
NJ.
June 10, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., in Dallas, TX.
June 29, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., in Washington, DC.
The deadlines for confirmed registration at each meeting are May
20, May 27, and June 15, 2010 respectively.
ADDRESSES:
I. Registration
Submit your notice of intent to participate in one of the scheduled
meetings by one of the following:
Electronic. Register at https://www2.ergweb.com/projects/conferences/osha/register-osha-I2P2.htm (follow the instructions
online).
Facsimile. Fax your request to: (781) 674-2906, and label
it ``Attention: OSHA I2P2 Stakeholder Meeting Registration.''
Regular mail, express delivery, hand (courier) delivery,
and messenger service.
Send your request to: Eastern Research Group, Inc., 110 Hartwell
Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421; Attention: OSHA I2P2 Stakeholder Meeting
Registration.
II. Meetings
Specific information on the location of each meeting can be found
on the I2P2 Web site at https://www2.ergweb.com/projects/conferences/osha/register-osha-I2P2.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
Press inquiries. Contact Jennifer Ashley, Director, OSHA
Office of Communications, Room N-3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-
1999.
General and technical information. Contact Michael
Seymour, OSHA Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Room N-3718, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210, telephone: (202) 693-1950.
Copies of this Federal Register notice. Electronic copies
are available at https://www.regulations.gov. This Federal Register
notice, as well as news releases and other relevant information, also
are available on the OSHA Web page at https://www.osha.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Over the past 30 years, the occupational safety and health
community has used various names to describe systematic approaches to
reducing injuries and illnesses in the workplace. OSHA has voluntary
Safety and Health Management Program guidelines, consensus and
international standards use the term ``Safety and Health Management
Systems,'' and OSHA's state plan states use terms such as ``Injury and
Illness Prevention Programs'' and ``Accident Prevention Programs.'' In
this notice, OSHA uses the term ``Injury and Illness Prevention
Programs.'' Regardless of the title, the common goal of these
approaches is to help employers reduce workplace injuries and illnesses
through a systematic process that proactively addresses workplace
safety and health hazards.
OSHA's History With Safety and Health Programs
The Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) (the
Act) in Section 17, paragraph (j), provides the Occupational Safety and
Health Review Commission (OSHRC) the authority to assess civil
penalties giving due consideration to the good faith of the employer.
Based on this paragraph of the Act, OSHA has also had a policy of
reducing penalties for employers who have violated OSHA standards but
who have demonstrated a good faith effort to provide a safe and healthy
workplace to their employees. The Agency has long recognized the
implementation of a safety and health program as a way of demonstrating
good faith. Similarly, in its first decision, the OSHRC held that good
faith compliance efforts are gauged primarily by the presence of
effective safety and health programs (Nacirema Operating Co., 1 O.S.H.
Cas. (BNA) 1001 (Rev. Comm'n 1972)).
Over the years, OSHA has established a number of initiatives to
encourage employers to develop and implement employee safety and health
programs. OSHA's Small Business Consultation Program, which offers
small businesses with exemplary safety and health programs an
opportunity for recognition under their Safety and Health Achievement
Recognition Program (SHARP) and the Agency's Voluntary Protection
Program (VPP) are two examples of such initiatives. The Agency
established the VPP to recognize companies in the private sector with
outstanding records in the area of employee safety and health. It
became apparent that many of these worksites, which had higher levels
of compliance, fewer serious hazards, and injury and illness rates
markedly below industry averages, were relying on safety and health
programs to produce these results.
Based on the growing support for safety and health programs, OSHA
issued the Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines in 1989 (54
FR 3908). These guidelines reflect the best management practices of
successful companies and encourage employers to institute and maintain
a program which provides systematic policies, procedures, and practices
that are adequate to recognize and protect their employees from
occupational safety and health hazards. The guidelines identify four
major elements of an effective program: Management commitment and
employee involvement; worksite analysis; hazard prevention and
controls; and safety and health training.
OSHA's Previous Rulemaking Effort
In October of 1995, OSHA held the first series of stakeholder
meetings to discuss preliminary ideas for a safety and health program
rule and the significant issues that would be raised by such a rule.
Many small businesses and organizations representing small businesses
attended the stakeholder meetings. Staff members from the Office of
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) were also present
at the stakeholder meetings.
In all, OSHA interacted with hundreds of stakeholders, including
employers, employees, employee representatives, trade associations,
State and local government personnel, safety and health professionals,
Advisory Committees, and other interested parties.
In 1998, OSHA developed a draft proposed rule that would have
required employers in general industry and maritime workplaces to
establish safety and health programs. The program in the draft proposed
rule had five core elements, including: Management leadership and
employee participation; hazard identification and assessment; hazard
prevention and control; information and training; and evaluation of the
program's effectiveness. In developing the draft proposed rule, OSHA
worked extensively with stakeholders from labor, industry, safety and
health organizations, State governments, trade associations, insurance
companies, and small businesses.
On October 20, 1998, OSHA convened a Small Business Regulatory
[[Page 23639]]
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) Panel for the draft Safety and Health
Programs proposed rule. The Panel provided small entity representatives
(SERs) with initial drafts of the rule, a summary of the rule, the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, a summary of the benefits and
costs of the rule as it affected firms in the small entity
representative's industry, OSHA's draft enforcement policy for the
rule, and a list of issues of interest to panel members.
The SBREFA Panel held teleconferences and received written comments
from the SERs. The comments, and the Panel's responses to them, formed
the principal basis for the Panel's report. The Panel's report provided
background information on the draft proposed rule and the types of
small entities that would be subject to the proposed rule, described
the Panel's efforts to obtain the advice and recommendations of
representatives of those small entities, summarized the comments that
had been received from those representatives, and presented the
findings and recommendations of the Panel.
A proposed Safety and Health Program rule was never published, and
the rulemaking effort was removed from the Regulatory Agenda on August
15, 2002. However, the effort in the 1990s showed the interest of OSHA,
the States, employers, employees, OSHA's advisory committees, and
others in a systematic process that proactively addresses workplace
safety and health hazards. It demonstrated that OSHA was not alone in
believing that these processes work to save lives and to prevent
injuries and illnesses in the workplace.
Safety and Health Management System Consensus Standards
Recently, consensus standards have been developed that address
safety and health management systems. The American Industrial Hygiene
Association published a voluntary consensus standard, ANSI/AIHA Z10--
2005 Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, based on the
``Plan-Do-Check-Act'' cycle. The Z10 standard places an emphasis on
continual improvement and systematically eliminating the underlying
root cause of hazards. In addition, the Occupational Health and Safety
Assessment Series (OHSAS) Project Group, which is an international
association of government agencies, private industries, and consulting
organizations, developed OHSAS 18001--2007 Occupational Health and
Safety Management Systems in response to customer demand for a
recognized occupational health and safety management system standard
against which their management systems could be assessed and certified.
The OHSAS 18001 is published by the British Standards Institute.
II. Stakeholder Meetings
Stakeholder meetings will provide OSHA with current information and
appreciation of the views of a wide range of interests. The meetings
will be conducted as a group discussion. To facilitate as much group
interaction as possible, formal presentations will not be permitted.
OSHA believes the stakeholder meeting discussion should center on major
issues such as:
Possible regulatory approaches.
Scope and application of a rule.
--Covered industries.
--Covered employers (size, high/low injury rates).
--Covered hazards.
--Relationship to existing OSHA requirements.
Organization of a rule.
--Regulatory text.
--Mandatory or voluntary appendices.
--Other standards incorporated by reference.
The role of consensus standards.
Economic impacts.
Any additional topics as time permits.
In addition, OSHA is interested in receiving feedback on the
following specific questions:
In light of the ANSI Z10 standard, the OHSAS 18001
standard, and OSHA's 1989 guidelines, what are the advantages and
disadvantages of addressing through rulemaking a systematic process
that proactively addresses workplace safety and health hazards?
Based on OSHA's experience, the agency believes that an
I2P2 rule would include the following elements:
1. Management duties (including items such as establishing a
policy, setting goals, planning and allocating resources, and assigning
and communicating roles and responsibilities);
2. Employee participation (including items such as involving
employees in establishing, maintaining and evaluating the program,
employee access to safety and health information, and employee role in
incident investigations);
3. Hazard identification and assessment (including items such as
what hazards must be identified, information gathering, workplace
inspections, incident investigations, hazards associated with changes
in the workplace, emergency hazards, hazard assessment and
prioritization, and hazard identification tools);
4. Hazard prevention and control (including items such as what
hazards must be controlled, hazard control priorities, and the
effectiveness of the controls);
5. Education and training (including items such as content of
training, relationship to other OSHA training requirements, and
periodic training); and
6. Program evaluation and improvement (including items such as
monitoring performance, correcting program deficiencies, and improving
program performance).
Are these the appropriate elements? Which elements are essential
for an effective approach? Should additional elements be included?
How can OSHA ensure that small business employers are able
to implement and maintain an effective I2P2?
Should an OSHA I2P2 rule apply to every business or should
it be limited in some way based on an employer's size, industry,
incident rates, and/or hazard indices?
To what extent should OSHA rely on existing consensus
standards in developing a rule?
How can OSHA use state experience with injury and illness
prevention in developing a rule?
What mechanisms have been found to be effective for
enabling employees to participate in safety and health in the
workplace?
Given the variety of names used to describe processes to
reduce injuries and illnesses in the workplace, what is the most
appropriate name for OSHA to describe this topic?
III. Public Participation
Approximately 50 participants will be accommodated in each meeting,
and eight hours will be allotted for each meeting. Members of the
general public may observe, but not participate in, the meetings on a
first-come, first-served basis as space permits. OSHA staff will be
present to take part in the discussions. Logistics for the meetings are
being managed by Eastern Research Group (ERG), which will provide a
facilitator and compile notes summarizing the discussion; these notes
will not identify individual speakers. ERG also will make an audio
recording of each session to ensure that the summary notes are
accurate; these recordings will not be transcribed. The summary notes
will be available on OSHA's Web page at https://www.osha.gov.
[[Page 23640]]
Specific information on the location of each meeting can be found
on the I2P2 Web site at https://www2.ergweb.com/projects/conferences/osha/register-osha-I2P2.htm.
To participate in one of the stakeholder meetings, or be a
nonparticipating observer, you may submit notice of intent
electronically, by facsimile, or by hard copy. In order to encourage as
wide a range of viewpoints as possible, OSHA will confirm participants
as necessary to ensure a fair representation of interests and to
facilitate gathering diverse viewpoints. To receive a confirmation of
your participation 1 week before the meeting, register by the date
listed in the DATES section of this notice. However, registration will
remain open until the meetings are full. Additional nonparticipating
observers that do not register for the meeting will be accommodated as
space permits. See the ADDRESSES section of this notice for the
registration Web site, facsimile number, and address. To register
electronically, follow the instructions provided on the Web site. To
register by mail or facsimile, please indicate the following:
Name, address, phone, fax, and e-mail.
Meeting location you would like to attend.
Organization for which you work.
Organization you represent (if different).
Stakeholder category: Government, industry, standards-
developing organization, research or testing agency, union, trade
association, insurance, consultant, or other (if other, please
specify).
Industry sector (if applicable).
Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice, as well as news
releases and other relevant documents, are available on the OSHA Web
page at: https://www.osha.gov.
IV. Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under the direction of David Michaels,
PhD, MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and
Health, U.S. Department of Labor, pursuant to sections 4, 6, and 8 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657), 29 CFR part 1911, and Secretary's Order 5-2007 (72 FR 31160).
Signed at Washington, DC, on April 12, 2010.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2010-10138 Filed 5-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P