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 http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA’s Web page at http:// 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 http://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 http://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 http:// 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: http://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: • http://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 http:// 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 http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://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 http:// 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 http:// www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http:// 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 http:// 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 http://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 http://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 http://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: http://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