Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings, 70698-71073 [2024-14824]
Download as PDF
70698
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
29 CFR Part 1910, 1915, 1917, 1918,
1926, and 1928
[Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009]
RIN 1218–AD39
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM); request for comments.
AGENCY:
OSHA is proposing to issue a
new standard, titled Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention in Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings. The standard
would apply to all employers
conducting outdoor and indoor work in
all general industry, construction,
maritime, and agriculture sectors where
OSHA has jurisdiction, with some
exceptions. It would be a programmatic
standard that would require employers
to create a plan to evaluate and control
heat hazards in their workplace. It
would more clearly set forth employer
obligations and the measures necessary
to effectively protect employees from
hazardous heat. OSHA requests
comments on all aspects of the proposed
rule.
DATES: Comments to this NPRM
(including requests for a hearing) and
other information must be submitted by
December 30, 2024.
Informal public hearing: OSHA will
schedule an informal public hearing on
the proposed rule if requested during
the comment period. If a hearing is
requested, the location and date of the
hearing, procedures for interested
parties to notify the agency of their
intention to participate, and procedures
for participants to submit their
testimony and documentary evidence
will be announced in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit
comments and attachments, identified
by Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009,
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, which is the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow the
instructions online for making
electronic submissions. After accessing
‘‘all documents and comments’’ in the
docket (Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009),
check the ‘‘proposed rule’’ box in the
column headed ‘‘Document Type,’’ find
the document posted on the date of
publication of this document, and click
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the ‘‘Comment Now’’ link. When
uploading multiple attachments to
regulations.gov, please number all of
your attachments because
regulations.gov will not automatically
number the attachments. This will be
very useful in identifying all
attachments. For example, Attachment
1—title of your document, Attachment
2—title of your document, Attachment
3—title of your document. For
assistance with commenting and
uploading documents, please see the
Frequently Asked Questions on
regulations.gov.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency’s name and the
docket number for this rulemaking
(Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009). 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 commenters about submitting
information they do not want made
available to the public, or submitting
materials that contain personal
information (either about themselves or
others), such as Social Security
Numbers and birthdates.
Docket citations: This Federal
Register document references material
in Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009, which
is the docket for this rulemaking.
Citations to documents: The docket
referenced most frequently in this
document is the docket for this
rulemaking, docket number OSHA–
2021–0009, cited as Document ID
OSHA–2021–0009. Documents in the
docket get an individual document
identification number, for example
‘‘OSHA–2021–0009–0047.’’ Because this
is the most frequently cited docket, the
citation is shortened to indicate only the
document number. The example is cited
in the NPRM as ‘‘Document ID 0047.’’
Documents cited in this NPRM are
available in the rulemaking docket
(Docket ID OSHA–2021–0009). They are
available to read and download by
searching the docket number or
document ID number at https://
www.regulations.gov. Each docket index
lists all documents in that docket,
including public comments, supporting
materials, meeting transcripts, and other
documents. However, some documents
(e.g., copyrighted material) in the
dockets are not available to read or
download from that website. All
documents in the dockets are available
for inspection at the OSHA Docket
Office. This information can be used to
search for a supporting document in the
docket at www.regulations.gov. Contact
the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–
2350 (TTY number: 877–889–5627) for
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
assistance in locating docket
submissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For press inquiries: Contact Frank
Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of
Communications, Occupational Safety
and Health Administration; telephone:
(202) 693–1999; email:
meilinger.francis2@dol.gov.
General information and technical
inquiries: Contact Stephen Schayer,
Director, Office of Physical Hazards and
Others, OSHA Directorate of Standards
and Guidance; telephone: (202) 693–
1950; email: osha.dsg@dol.gov.
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 at OSHA’s web page
at https://www.osha.gov.
The docket is available at https://
www.regulations.gov, the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. A ‘‘100-word
summary’’ is also available on https://
www.regulations.gov. For additional
information on submitting items to, or
accessing items in, the docket, please
refer to the ADDRESSES section of this
NPRM. Most exhibits are available at
https://www.regulations.gov; some
exhibits (e.g., copyrighted material) are
not available to download from that web
page. However, all materials in the
dockets are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Pertinent Legal Authority
A. Introduction
B. Significant Risk
C. Feasibility
D. High Degree of Employee Protection
III. Background
A. Introduction
B. Need for Proposal
C. Events Leading to Proposal
D. Other Standards
IV. Health Effects
A. Introduction
B. General Mechanisms of Heat-Related
Health Effects
C. Identifying Cases of Heat-Related Health
Effects
D. Heat-Related Deaths
E. Heat Stroke
F. Heat Exhaustion
G. Heat Syncope
H. Rhabdomyolysis
I. Hyponatremia
J. Heat Cramps
K. Heat Rash
L. Heat Edema
M. Kidney Health Effects
N. Other Health Effects
O. Factors That Affect Risk for HeatRelated Health Effects
P. Heat-Related Injuries
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
V. Risk Assessment
A. Risk Assessment
B. Basis for Initial and High Heat Triggers
C. Risk Reduction
VI. Significance of Risk
A. Material Harm
B. Significant Risk
C. Preliminary Conclusions
VII. Explanation of Proposed Requirements
A. Paragraph (a) Scope and Application
B. Paragraph (b) Definitions
C. Paragraph (c) Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Plan
D. Paragraph (d) Identifying Heat Hazards
E. Paragraph (e) Requirements at or Above
the Initial Heat Trigger
F. Paragraph (f) Requirements at or Above
the High Heat Trigger
G. Paragraph (g) Heat Illness and
Emergency Response and Planning
H. Paragraph (h) Training
I. Paragraph (i) Recordkeeping
J. Paragraph (j) Requirements Implemented
at no Cost to Employees
K. Paragraph (k) Dates
L. Paragraph (l) Severability
VIII. Preliminary Economic Analysis and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
A. Market Failure and Need for Regulation
B. Profile of Affected Industries
C. Costs of Compliance
D. Economic Feasibility
E. Benefits
F. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
G. Distributional Analysis
H. Appendix A. Description of the Cost
Savings Approach
I. Appendix B. Review of Literature on
Effects of Heat Exposure on Non-Health
Outcomes
J. Appendix C. Heat Exposure Methodology
Used in Distributional Analysis
K. Appendix D. Definitions of Core
Industry Categories Used in Cost
Analysis
IX. Technological Feasibility
X. Additional Requirements
A. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
B. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments/Executive
Order 13175
C. Consultation With the Advisory
Committee on Construction Safety and
Health
D. Environmental Impacts
E. Consensus Standards
F. Incorporation by Reference
G. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks
H. Federalism
I. Requirements for States With OSHAApproved State Plans
J. OMB Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
XI. Authority and Signature
I. Executive Summary
Heat is the leading cause of death
among all weather-related phenomena
in the United States. Excessive heat in
the workplace can cause a number of
adverse health effects, including heat
stroke and even death, if not treated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
properly. Yet, there is currently no
Federal OSHA standard that regulates
heat stress hazards in the workplace.
Although several governmental and
non-governmental organizations have
published regulations and guidance to
help protect workers from heat hazards,
OSHA believes that a mandatory
Federal standard specific to heat-related
injury and illness prevention is
necessary to address the hazards posed
by occupational heat exposure. OSHA
has preliminarily determined that this
proposed rule would substantially
reduce the risk posed by occupational
exposure to hazardous heat by clearly
setting forth employer obligations and
the measures necessary to effectively
protect exposed workers.
OSHA is proposing this standard
pursuant to the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.
(OSH Act or Act). The Act authorizes
the agency to issue safety or health
standards that are ‘‘reasonably necessary
or appropriate’’ to provide safe or
healthful employment and places of
employment (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). A
standard is reasonably necessary or
appropriate when a significant risk of
material harm exists in the workplace
and the standard would substantially
reduce or eliminate that workplace risk.
Applicable legal requirements are more
fully discussed in Section II., Pertinent
Legal Authority.
Workers in both outdoor and indoor
work settings without adequate climate
controls are at risk of hazardous heat
exposure. Certain heat-generating
processes, machinery, and equipment
(e.g., hot tar ovens, furnaces) can also
cause heat hazards when cooling
measures are not in place. Based on the
best available evidence, as discussed in
this preamble, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that exposure to hazardous
heat in the workplace poses a significant
risk of serious injury and illness. This
finding of a significant risk of material
harm is based on the health
consequences associated with exposure
to heat (see Section IV., Health Effects)
as well as the risk assessment (see
Section V., Risk Assessment and Section
VI., Significance of Risk). In Section
V.C., Risk Reduction, OSHA
demonstrates the efficacy of the controls
relied on in this proposed rule to reduce
the risk of heat-related injury and illness
in the workplace. Employees working in
workplaces without these controls are at
higher risk of severe health outcomes
from exposure to hazardous heat.
On October 27, 2021, OSHA
published in the Federal Register an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) for Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70699
Settings (86 FR 59309). The ANPRM
outlined key issues and challenges in
occupational heat-related injury and
illness prevention and aimed to collect
evidence, data, and information critical
to informing how OSHA proceeds in the
rulemaking process. The ANPRM
included background information on
injuries, illnesses, and fatalities due to
heat, underreporting, scope, geographic
region, and inequality in exposures and
outcomes. The ANPRM also covered
existing heat injury and illness
prevention efforts including OSHA’s
efforts, the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) criteria documents, State
standards, and other standards.
OSHA received 965 unique public
comments, which largely supported the
need for continued rulemaking. The
agency then worked with the National
Advisory Committee on Occupational
Safety and Health (NACOSH) to
assemble a Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group. The Work
Group was tasked with evaluating
stakeholder input to the ANPRM and
developing recommendations on
potential elements of a proposed heat
injury and illness prevention standard.
The Work Group presented its
recommendations on potential elements
of a proposed heat injury and illness
prevention standard for consideration
by the full NACOSH committee. On
May 31, 2023, NACOSH amended the
report to ask OSHA to include a model
written plan and then unanimously
voted to submit the Work Group’s
recommendations to the Secretary of
Labor.
In accordance with the requirements
of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA),
OSHA next convened a Small Business
Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel in
August 2023. The Panel, comprised of
members from the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) Office of
Advocacy, OSHA, and OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
heard comments directly from Small
Entity Representatives (SERs) on the
potential impacts of a heat-specific
standard. The Panel received advice and
recommendations from the SERs and
reported its findings and
recommendations to OSHA. OSHA has
taken the SER’s comments and the
Panel’s findings and recommendations
into consideration in the development
of this proposed rule (see Section
VIII.F., Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis).
In accordance with 29 CFR parts 1911
and 1912, OSHA also consulted with
and considered feedback from the
Advisory Committee on Construction
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70700
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Safety and Health (ACCSH). On April
24, 2024, the Committee unanimously
passed a motion recommending that
OSHA proceed expeditiously with
proposing a standard on heat injury and
illness prevention. In addition, in
accordance with Executive Order 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, 65 FR
67249 (Nov. 6, 2000), OSHA held a
listening session on May 15, 2024, with
Tribal representatives regarding this
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings
rulemaking and provided an
opportunity for the representatives to
offer feedback.
The proposed rule is a programmatic
standard that requires employers to
create a heat injury and illness
prevention plan to evaluate and control
heat hazards in their workplace. It
establishes requirements for identifying
heat hazards, implementing engineering
and work practice control measures at
or above two heat trigger levels (i.e., an
initial heat trigger and a high heat
trigger), developing and implementing a
heat illness and emergency response
plan, providing training to employees
and supervisors, and retaining records.
The proposed rule would apply to all
employers conducting outdoor and
indoor work in all general industry,
construction, maritime, and agriculture
sectors, with some exceptions (see
Section VII.A., Paragraph (a) Scope and
Application). Throughout this
document, OSHA seeks input on
alternatives and potential exclusions.
Organizations affected by heat
hazards vary significantly in size and
workplace activities. Accordingly, many
of the provisions of the proposed
standard provide flexibility for affected
employers to choose the control
measures most suited to their
workplace. The flexible nature of the
proposed rule may be particularly
beneficial to small organizations with
limited resources.
Additionally, to determine whether
the proposed rule is feasible for affected
employers, and in accordance with
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C 1501 et seq.), OSHA has prepared
a Preliminary Economic Analysis (PEA),
including an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (see Section VIII.,
Preliminary Economic Analysis and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis).
Supporting materials prepared by OSHA
are available in the public docket for
this rulemaking, Document ID OSHA–
2021–0009, through regulations.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
II. Pertinent Legal Authority
A. Introduction
In the Occupational Safety and Health
Act, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq., Congress
authorized the Secretary of Labor (‘‘the
Secretary’’) ‘‘to set mandatory
occupational safety and health
standards applicable to businesses
affecting interstate commerce’’ (29
U.S.C. 651(b)(3); see Nat’l Fed’n of
Indep. Bus. v. Dep’t of Labor, 595 U.S.
109, 117 (2022) (per curiam); see also 29
U.S.C. 654(a)(2) (requiring employers to
comply with OSHA standards)). Section
6(b) of the Act authorizes the
promulgation, modification or
revocation of occupational safety or
health standards pursuant to detailed
notice and comment procedures (29
U.S.C. 655(b)).
Section 3(8) of the Act defines a safety
or health standard as a standard which
requires conditions, or the adoption or
use of one or more practices, means,
methods, operations, or processes
‘‘reasonably necessary or appropriate’’
to provide safe or healthful employment
and places of employment (29 U.S.C.
652(8)). A standard is reasonably
necessary or appropriate within the
meaning of section 3(8) when a
significant risk of material harm exists
in the workplace and the standard
would substantially reduce or eliminate
that workplace risk (see Indus. Union
Dep’t, AFL–CIO v. Am. Petroleum Inst.,
448 U.S. 607 (1980) (‘‘Benzene’’)).
OSHA’s authority extends to, for
example, removing workers from
environments where workplace hazards
exist (see, e.g., United Steelworkers of
America v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189,
1228–38 (D.C. Cir. 1981); 29 CFR
1910.1028(i)(8); 29 CFR 1910.1024(l); cf.
Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, 445 U.S. 1,
12 (1980) (upholding regulation
allowing employees to refuse dangerous
work in certain circumstances because
‘‘[t]he Act does not wait for an employee
to die or become injured.’’).
In addition to the requirement that
each standard address a significant risk,
standards must also be technologically
feasible (see UAW v. OSHA, 37 F.3d
665, 668 (D.C. Cir. 1994)). A standard is
technologically feasible when the
protective measures it requires already
exist, when available technology can
bring the protective measures into
existence, or when that technology is
reasonably likely to develop (see Am.
Iron and Steel Inst. v. OSHA, 939 F.2d
975, 980 (D.C. Cir. 1991)).
Finally, a standard must be
economically feasible (see Forging
Indus. Ass’n v. Secretary of Labor, 773
F.2d 1436, 1453 (4th Cir. 1985)). A
standard is economically feasible if
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
industry can absorb or pass on the costs
of compliance without threatening its
long-term profitability or competitive
structure (see American Textile Mfrs.
Inst., Inc., 452 U.S. 490, 530 n.55
(‘‘Cotton Dust’’)). Each of these
requirements is discussed further below.
B. Significant Risk
As noted above, OSHA’s workplace
safety and health standards must
address a significant risk of material
harm that exists in the workplace (see
Benzene, 448 U.S. at 614–15). The
agency’s risk assessments are based on
the best available evidence, and its final
conclusions are made only after
considering all information in the
rulemaking record. Reviewing courts
have upheld the Secretary’s significant
risk determinations where supported by
substantial evidence and ‘‘a reasoned
explanation for [their] policy
assumptions and conclusions’’ (Bldg &
Constr. Trades Dep’t v. Brock, 838 F.2d
1258, 1266 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (‘‘Asbestos
II’’)).
The Supreme Court in Benzene
explained that ‘‘[i]t is the agency’s
responsibility to determine, in the first
instance, what it considers to be a
‘significant’ risk’’ (Benzene, 448 U.S. at
655). The Court declined to ‘‘express
any opinion on the . . . difficult
question of what factual determinations
would warrant a conclusion that
significant risks are present which make
promulgation of a new standard
reasonably necessary or appropriate’’
(Benzene, 448 U.S. at 659). The Court
stated, however, that the substantial
evidence standard applicable to OSHA’s
significant risk determination (see 29
U.S.C. 655(b)(f)) does not require the
agency ‘‘to support its finding that a
significant risk exists with anything
approaching scientific certainty’’
(Benzene, 448 U.S. at 656). Rather,
OSHA may rely on ‘‘a body of reputable
scientific thought’’ to which
‘‘conservative assumptions in
interpreting the data’’ may be applied,
‘‘risking error on the side of
overprotection’’ (Benzene, 448 U.S. at
656). The D.C. Circuit has further
explained that OSHA may thus act with
a pronounced bias towards worker
safety in making its risk determinations
(Asbestos II, 838 F.2d at 1266). The
Supreme Court also recognized that the
determination of what constitutes
‘‘significant risk’’ is ‘‘not a mathematical
straitjacket’’ and will be ‘‘based largely
on policy considerations’’ (Benzene, 448
U.S. at 655 & n.62).
Once OSHA makes its significant risk
finding, the standard it promulgates
must be ‘‘reasonably necessary or
appropriate’’ to reduce or eliminate that
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
risk (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). In choosing
among regulatory alternatives, however,
‘‘[t]he determination that [one standard]
is appropriate, as opposed to a
marginally [more or less protective]
standard, is a technical decision
entrusted to the expertise of the agency’’
(Nat’l Mining Ass’n v. Mine Safety and
Health Admin., 116 F.3d 520, 528 (D.C.
Cir. 1997) (analyzing a Mine Safety and
Health Administration standard under
the Benzene significant risk standard)).
C. Feasibility
The statutory mandate to consider the
feasibility of the standard encompasses
both technological and economic
feasibility; OSHA has performed these
analyses primarily on an industry-byindustry basis (United Steelworkers of
Am., AFL–CIO–CLC v. Marshall, 647
F.2d 1189, 1264, 1301 (D.C. Cir. 1980)
(‘‘Lead I’’)). The agency has also used
application groups, defined by common
tasks, as the structure for its feasibility
analyses (Pub. Citizen Health Research
Grp. v. OSHA, 557 F.3d 165, 177–79 (3d
Cir. 2009)). The Supreme Court has
broadly defined feasible as ‘‘capable of
being done’’ (Cotton Dust, 452 U.S. at
509–10).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Technological Feasibility
A standard is technologically feasible
if the protective measures it requires
already exist, can be brought into
existence with available technology, or
can be created with technology that can
reasonably be expected to be developed
(Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272; Amer. Iron &
Steel Inst. v. OSHA, 939 F.2d 975, 980
(D.C. Cir. 1991) (‘‘Lead II’’)). Courts have
also interpreted technological feasibility
to mean that a typical firm in each
affected industry or application group
will reasonably be able to implement
the requirements of the standard in most
operations most of the time (see Public
Citizen v. OSHA, 557 F.3d 165, 170–71
(3d Cir. 2009); Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272;
Lead II, 939 F.2d at 990)). OSHA’s
standards may be ‘‘technology forcing,’’
so long as the agency gives an industry
a reasonable amount of time to develop
new technologies to comply with the
standard. Thus, OSHA is not bound by
the ‘‘technological status quo’’ (Lead I,
647 F.2d at 1264).
II. Economic Feasibility
In addition to technological
feasibility, OSHA is required to
demonstrate that its standards are
economically feasible. A reviewing
court will examine the cost of
compliance with an OSHA standard ‘‘in
relation to the financial health and
profitability of the industry and the
likely effect of such costs on unit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
consumer prices’’ (Lead I, 647 F.2d at
1265 (citation omitted)). As articulated
by the D.C. Circuit in Lead I, ‘‘OSHA
must construct a reasonable estimate of
compliance costs and demonstrate a
reasonable likelihood that these costs
will not threaten the existence or
competitive structure of an industry,
even if it does portend disaster for some
marginal firms’’ (Lead I, 647 F.2d at
1272). A reasonable estimate entails
assessing ‘‘the likely range of costs and
the likely effects of those costs on the
industry’’ (Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1266). As
with OSHA’s consideration of scientific
data and control technology, however,
the estimates need not be precise
(Cotton Dust, 452 U.S. at 528–29 &
n.54), as long as they are adequately
explained.
OSHA standards satisfy the economic
feasibility criterion even if they impose
significant costs on regulated industries
so long as they do not cause massive
economic dislocations within a
particular industry or imperil the very
existence of the industry (Lead II, 939
F.2d at 980; see also Lead I, 647 F.2d at
1272; Asbestos I, 499 F.2d. at 478). As
with its other legal findings, OSHA ‘‘is
not required to prove economic
feasibility with certainty, but is required
to use the best available evidence and to
support its conclusions with substantial
evidence’’ (Lead II, 939 F.2d at 980–81
(citing Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1267)).
In addition to determining economic
feasibility, OSHA estimates the costs
and benefits of its proposed and final
rules to ensure compliance with other
requirements such as those in Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563.
D. High Degree of Employee Protection
Safety standards must provide a high
degree of employee protection to be
consistent with the purpose of the Act
(see Control of Hazardous Energy
Sources (Lockout/Tagout) Final Rule,
Supplemental Statement of Reasons, 58
FR 16612, 16614–15 (March 30, 1993)).
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that this proposed standard is a safety
standard because the health effects
associated with exposure to
occupational heat are generally acute.
As explained in Section IV., Health
Effects, the proposed standard aims to
address the numerous acute health
effects of occupational exposure to
hazardous heat. These include, among
other things, heat stroke, heat
exhaustion, heat syncope, and physical
injuries (e.g., falls) due to fatigue or
other heat-related impairments. These
harms occur after relatively short-term
exposures to hazardous heat and are
typically apparent at the time of the
exposure or shortly thereafter.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70701
Consequently, the link between these
harms and heat exposures is also often
apparent and they do not implicate the
concerns about latent, hidden harms
that underly health standards (see
Benzene, 448 U.S. at 649 n. 54; UAW v.
OSHA, 938 F.2d 1310, 1313 (D.C. Cir.
1991) (‘‘Lockout/Tagout I’’); National
Grain & Feed Ass’n v. OSHA, 866 F.2d
717, 733 (5th Cir. 1989) (‘‘Grain Dust’’)).
Finally, although OSHA
acknowledges that there is growing
evidence occupational exposure to
hazardous heat may lead to some
chronic adverse health outcomes like
chronic kidney disease, much of the
science in this area is still developing
(see Section IV., Health Effects). In any
event, the agency expects that
addressing the acute hazards posed by
heat would also protect workers from
potential chronic health outcomes by
reducing workers’ overall heat strain.
III. Background
A. Introduction
The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) is proposing a
new standard to protect outdoor and
indoor workers from hazardous heat in
the workplace. OSHA promulgates and
enforces occupational safety and health
standards under authority granted by
the Occupational Safety and Health
(OSH) Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.).
In the absence of a Federal
occupational heat standard, five States
have issued heat injury and illness
prevention regulations to protect
employees exposed to heat hazards in
the workplace: Minnesota (Minn. R.
5205.0110 (1997)); California (Cal. Code
of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005));
Oregon (Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156
(2022); Or. Admin. R. 437–004–1131
(2022)); Colorado (7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103–15 (2022)); and
Washington (Wash. Admin. Code
sections 296–62–095 through 296–62–
09560; 296–307–097 through 296–307–
09760 (2023)). Although Minnesota was
the first State to adopt a standard
covering employees exposed to indoor
environmental heat conditions,
California was the first State to adopt a
standard covering employees exposed to
outdoor environmental heat conditions.
Washington, Oregon, and Colorado have
since enacted similar regulations to
California’s, requiring employers to
implement controls and monitor for
signs and symptoms of heat-related
injury or illness, among other
requirements. In 2023, California
proposed a new standard that would
cover indoor work environments
(California, 2023). In 2024, Maryland
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70702
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
published a proposed standard that
would cover both outdoor and indoor
work environments (Maryland, 2024).
Workers in many industries are at risk
for heat-related injury and illness
stemming from hazardous heat exposure
(see Section V.A., Risk Assessment).
While the general population may be
able to avoid and limit prolonged heat
exposure, workers across a wide range
of indoor and outdoor settings often are
required to work through shifts with
prolonged heat exposure. Some
workplaces have heat generation from
industrial processes and expose workers
to sources of radiant heat, such as ovens
and furnaces. Additionally, employers
may not take adequate steps to protect
their employees from exposure to
hazardous heat (e.g., not providing rest
breaks in cool areas). Many work
operations also require the use of
personal protective equipment (PPE)
that can reduce the worker’s heat
tolerance because it can decrease the
body’s ability to cool down. Workers
may also face pressure, or
incentivization through pay structures,
to push through and continue working
despite high heat exposure, which can
increase the risk of heat-related injury
and illness (Billikopf and Norton, 1992;
Johansson et al., 2010; Spector et al.,
2015; Pan et al., 2021).
OSHA uses several terms related to
excessive heat exposure throughout this
proposal. Heat stress is the combined
load of heat that a person experiences
from sources of heat (i.e., metabolic heat
and the environment) and heat retention
(e.g., from clothing or personal
protective equipment). Heat strain refers
to the body’s response to heat stress
(American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), 2023).
Heat-related illness means adverse
clinical health outcomes that occur due
to heat exposure, such as heat
exhaustion or heat stroke. Heat-related
injury means an injury linked to heat
exposure, such as a fall or cut. OSHA
sometimes refers to these collectively as
‘‘heat-related injuries and illnesses.’’
B. Need for Proposal
Occupational heat exposure affects
millions of workers in the United States.
Each year, thousands of workers
experience heat-related injuries and
illnesses, and some of these cases result
in fatalities (BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2024c).
OSHA has relied on the General Duty
Clause of the OSH Act (discussed
further below), as well as enforcement
emphasis programs and hazard alerts
and other guidance, to protect workers
and inform employers of their legal
obligations. However, a standard
specific to heat-related injury and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
illness prevention would more clearly
set forth enforceable employer
obligations and the measures necessary
to effectively protect employees from
hazardous heat.
Workers in both outdoor and indoor
work settings without adequate climate
controls are at risk of hazardous heat
exposure. In addition to weather-related
heat, certain heat-generating processes,
machinery, and equipment (e.g., hot tar
ovens, furnaces) can cause hazardous
heat exposure when cooling measures
are not in place. An evaluation of 66
heat-related illness enforcement
investigations from 2011–2016 found
heat-related injuries and illnesses,
including fatalities, occurring in both
outdoor (n=34) and indoor (n=29) work
environments (Tustin et al., 2018a).
Excessive heat exacerbates existing
health conditions like asthma, diabetes,
kidney failure, and heart disease, and
can cause heat stroke and death if not
treated properly and promptly. Some
groups may be more likely to experience
adverse health effects from heat, such as
pregnant workers (NIOSH, 2024), while
others are disproportionately exposed to
hazardous levels of heat, such as
workers of color in essential jobs, who
are more often employed in work
settings with a high risk of hazardous
heat exposure (Gubernot et al., 2015).
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS),
in its Census of Fatal Occupational
Injuries, documented 1,042 U.S. worker
deaths due to occupational exposure to
environmental heat from 1992–2022,
with an average of 34 fatalities per year
during that period (BLS, 2024c). In 2022
alone, BLS reported 43 work-related
deaths due to environmental heat
exposure (BLS, 2024c). The BLS Annual
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses (SOII) estimates 33,890 workrelated heat injuries and illnesses
involving days away from work from
2011–2020, which is an average of 3,389
injuries and illnesses occurring each
year during this period (BLS, 2023b).
Workers across hundreds of industries
are at risk for hazardous heat exposure
and resulting heat-related injuries and
illnesses. From January 1, 2017, to
December 31, 2022, 1,054 heat-related
injuries, illnesses, and fatalities were
reported to and investigated by OSHA,
including 625 heat-related
hospitalizations and 211 heat-related
fatalities, as well as 218 heat-related
injuries and illnesses that did not result
in hospitalization. During this time,
hospitalizations occurred most
frequently in construction,
manufacturing, and postal and delivery
service. Fatalities were most frequently
reported in construction, landscaping,
agriculture, manufacturing, and postal
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and delivery service (as identified by 2digit NAICS codes).
However, as explained in Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, these statistics
likely do not capture the true magnitude
and prevalence of heat-related injuries,
illnesses, and fatalities. Recent studies
demonstrate significant undercounting
of occupational injuries and illnesses by
both the BLS SOII and OSHA’s
enforcement data. One reason for this
undercounting is that the BLS SOII only
reports the number of heat-related
injuries and illnesses involving days
away from work and thus does not
capture the full picture of heat-related
injuries and illnesses. An examination
of workers’ compensation claims in
California, which include more than
only cases involving days away from
work, identified 3 to 6 times the number
of annual heat-related illness and injury
cases than reported by BLS SOII
(Heinzerling et al., 2020). In addition,
evidence has shown significant
underreporting as employers and
employees are disincentivized from
reporting injuries and illnesses due to
several factors, including potential
increases in workers’ compensation
costs or impacts on the employer’s
reputation, or an employee’s fear of
retaliation or lack of awareness of their
right to speak out about workplace
conditions (BLS, 2020b).
Heat-related injuries and illnesses
may present unique challenges to
surveillance efforts. As the nature of
heat-related symptoms (e.g., headache,
fatigue) vary, some cases may be
attributed to other illnesses rather than
heat (as discussed in Section IV., Health
Effects). Furthermore, heat is not always
identified as a contributing factor to
fatality, as heat exposure may
exacerbate existing medical conditions
and medical professionals may not
witness the symptoms and events
preceding death (Luber et al., 2006).
Finally, exposure to heat can interfere
with routine occupational tasks and
impact workers’ psychomotor and
mental performance, which can lead to
workplace injuries. Particularly, heat
can impair performance of job tasks
related to complex cognitive function
(Hancock and Vasmatzidis, 2003; Piil et
al., 2017) and reduce decision making
abilities (Ramsey et al., 1983; Xiang et
al., 2014a) and productivity (Foster et
al., 2021). A growing body of evidence
has demonstrated that heat-induced
impairments may result in significant
occupational injuries that are not
currently factored into official statistics
for heat-related cases (Spector et al.,
2016; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender,
2021; Park et al., 2021). See Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, for further
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
discussion on underreporting of heatrelated injuries, illnesses, and fatalities.
While a significant percentage of heatrelated incidents are unreported,
OSHA’s investigations of reported heatrelated fatalities point to many gaps in
employee protections. OSHA has
identified the following circumstances
in its review of 211 heat-related fatality
investigations from 2017–2022:
employees left alone by employers after
symptoms started; employers not
providing adequate medical attention to
employees with symptoms; employers
preventing employees from taking rest
breaks; employers not providing water
on-site; employers not providing on-site
access to shade; employers not
providing cooling measures on-site; and
employers not having programs to
acclimatize employees to hot work
environments (https://www.osha.gov/
fatalities). OSHA has relied on multiple
mechanisms to protect employees from
hazardous heat, however, OSHA’s
efforts to prevent the aforementioned
circumstances have been met with
challenges without a heat-specific
standard (as discussed in Section
III.C.III., OSHA’s Heat-Related
Enforcement).
Many U.S. States run their own
OSHA-approved State Plans (e.g., State
heat standards, voluntary consensus
standards) (see Section III.D., Other
Standards), however OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this
standard is still needed to protect
workers from the persistent and serious
hazards posed by occupational heat
exposure. As explained in Section VI.,
Significance of Risk, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that a
significant risk of material harm from
occupational exposure to hazardous
heat exists, and issuance of this
standard would substantially reduce
that risk. Therefore, to more clearly set
forth employer obligations and the
measures necessary to more effectively
protect employees from hazardous heat,
and reduce the number and frequency of
occupational injuries, illness, and
fatalities caused by exposure to
hazardous heat, OSHA is proposing a
Federal standard for Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention for Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings.
C. Events Leading to the Proposal
I. History of Heat as a Recognized
Occupational Hazard
Heat exposure has long been
recognized as an occupational hazard.
For example, in the United States, the
occupational hazards associated with
the construction of the Hoover Dam
between 1931 and 1935 brought
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
attention to the effects of heat on worker
health. The Bureau of Reclamation
reported that 14 dam workers and two
others residing in the work area died
from ‘‘heat prostration’’ in 1931 (Bureau
of Reclamation, 2015). According to a
local newspaper, temperatures at the
dam site that summer reached 140 °F in
the sun and 120 °F in the shade (Turk,
2018; Rogers, 2012). In response to the
extreme heat of the summer and other
unsafe working conditions, the
Industrial Workers of the World
convinced Hoover Dam workers to
strike over safety concerns (Turk, 2018;
Rogers, 2012). Six Companies, the
conglomerate of companies hired by the
Bureau of Reclamation to construct most
of the dam, was forced to make
concessions, including protections
against HRI such as providing potable
water in dormitories, bringing ice water
to workers at their work sites, and
adding first aid stations closer to the job
site (Rogers, 2012). The heat-related
deaths that occurred during 1931 also
prompted Harvard University
researchers from the Harvard Fatigue
Laboratory to travel to the Hoover Dam
and study the relationship between hot,
dry temperatures, physical performance,
and heart rate (Turk, 2018).
Heat-related illnesses were identified
as a major concern for the U.S. military
in the 1940s and 1950s. Between 1942
and 1944, 198 soldiers died of heat
stroke at U.S.-based training camps, 157
of which did not have a known history
of cardiac diseases or other conditions
that may predispose them to heat illness
(Schickele, 1947, p. 236). This led to
investigations of the environmental
conditions at the time of these deaths,
and eventually to the development of
wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) to
measure heat stress (Yaglou and Minard,
1957; Minard, 1961; Department of the
Army, 2022; Department of the Navy,
2023).
Research on the effects of
occupational heat exposure continued
in the 1960s, as researchers conducted
trials examining the physiological
effects of work at various temperatures
(e.g., Lind, 1963). Findings from these
trials would eventually underpin the
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)
Threshold Limit Value (TLV), as well as
the National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH)
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL)
(Dukes-Dobos and Henschel, 1973).
ACGIH first proposed guidelines for a
TLV in 1971, which were later adopted
in 1974.
Heat was recognized as a preventable
workplace hazard in the legislative
history of the OSH Act. Senator
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70703
Edmund Muskie submitted a letter in
support of the OSH Act into the
Congressional record on behalf of ‘‘a
distinguished group of citizens,
including a former Secretary of Labor
and several noted scientists.’’ (Senate
Debate on S. 2193, Nov. 16, 1970),
reprinted in Legislative History of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970, pp. 513–14 (1971) (Committee
Print) (‘‘Leg. Hist.’’). The letter states,
‘‘Most industrial diseases and accidents
are preventable. Modern technological
and medical sciences are capable of
solving the problems of noise, dust,
heat, fumes, and toxic substances in the
plants. However, existing legislation in
this area does not begin to meet the
problems’’ (Leg. Hist., pp. 513–14).
In 1972, just two years after
promulgation of the OSH Act, NIOSH
first recommended a potential OSHA
heat standard in its Criteria for a
Recommended Standard (NIOSH, 1972).
This criteria document, issued under
the authority of section 20(a) of the OSH
Act, recommended an OSHA standard
based on a critical review of scientific
and technical information. In response,
an OSHA Standards Advisory
Committee on Heat Stress was
appointed in 1973 and presented
recommendations for a standard for
work in hot environments in 1974. At
the time, 12 of 15 members of the
advisory committee agreed that
occupational heat stress warranted a
standard (Ramsey, 1975).
NIOSH’s criteria document for a
recommended standard has since been
updated in 1986 (NIOSH, 1986) and
again in 2016 (NIOSH, 2016). The 2016
criteria document recommends various
provisions to protect workers from heat
stress, including rest breaks, hydration,
shade, acclimatization plans, and
worker training (NIOSH, 2016). The
2016 criteria document also
recommends that no worker be
‘‘exposed to combinations of metabolic
and environmental heat greater than’’
the recommended alert limit (RAL) for
unacclimatized workers or the
recommended exposure limit (REL) for
acclimatized workers). The document
recommends that environmental heat be
assessed with measurements of WBGT
(NIOSH, 2016).
A detailed report of the history of heat
as a recognized occupational hazard is
available in the docket (ERG, 2024a).
The report summarizes historical
documentation of occupational heatrelated illness beginning in ancient
times and from the eighteenth century
through the regulatory interest in the
twentieth century.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70704
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
II. OSHA’s Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Efforts
In 2011, OSHA issued a memorandum
to inform regional administrators and
State Plan designees of inspection
guidance for heat-related illnesses
(OSHA, 2011). That same year, OSHA
launched the Heat Illness Prevention
Campaign (https://www.osha.gov/heat)
to build awareness of prevention
strategies and tools for employers and
workers to reduce occupational heatrelated illness. In its original form, the
Campaign delivered a message of
‘‘Water. Rest. Shade.’’ The agency
updated Campaign materials in 2021 to
recognize both indoor and outdoor heat
hazards, as well as the importance of
protecting new and returning workers
from hazardous heat with an
acclimatization period.
In addition, OSHA maintains on its
website a Heat Topics page on
workplace heat exposure (https://
www.osha.gov/heat-exposure/), which
provides additional information and
resources. The page provides
information on planning and
supervision in hot work environments,
identification of heat-related illness and
first aid, information on prevention
such as training, calculating heat stress
and controls, personal risk factors,
descriptions of other heat standards and
case study examples of situations where
workers developed heat-related illness.
OSHA and NIOSH also co-developed a
Heat Safety Tool Smartphone App for
both Android and iPhone devices (see
www.osha.gov/heat/heat-app). The app
provides outdoor, location-specific
temperature, humidity, and heat index
(HI) readings. Measurements for indoor
work sites must be collected and
manually entered into the app by the
user for accurate calculations. The app
also provides relevant information on
identifying signs and symptoms of heatrelated illness and steps to prevent heatrelated injuries and illnesses. Despite
the strengths and reach of the
Campaign, Heat Topics page, and Heat
Safety Tool App, these guidance and
communication materials are not legally
enforceable requirements.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. OSHA’s Heat-Related Enforcement
Without a specific standard governing
hazardous heat conditions at
workplaces, the agency currently
enforces section 5(a)(1) (the General
Duty Clause) of the OSH Act against
employers that expose their workers to
this recognized hazard. Section 5(a)(1)
states that employers have a general
duty to furnish to each of their
employees ‘‘employment and a place of
employment which are free from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
recognized hazards that are causing or
are likely to cause death or serious
physical harm’’ to employees (29 U.S.C.
654(a)(1)). To prove a violation of the
General Duty Clause, OSHA must
establish—in each individual case—
that: (1) the employer failed to keep the
workplace free of a hazard to which its
employees were exposed; (2) the hazard
was recognized; (3) the hazard was
causing or likely to cause death or
serious injury; and (4) a feasible means
to eliminate or materially reduce the
hazard existed (see, e.g., A.H. Sturgill
Roofing, Inc., 2019 O.S.H. Dec. (CCH)
¶ 33712, 2019 WL 1099857 (No. 13–
0224, 2019)).
OSHA has relied on the General Duty
Clause to cite employers for heat-related
hazards for decades (see, e.g., Duriron
Co., 11 BNA OSHC 1405, 1983 WL
23869 (No. 77–2847, 1983), aff’d, 750
F.2d 28 (6th Cir. 1984)). According to
available OSHA enforcement data,
between 1986 and 2023, Federal OSHA
issued at least 348 hazardous heatrelated citations under the General Duty
Clause. Of these citations, 85 were
issued between 1986–2000 (OSHA,
2024b). Citations were identified using
multiple queries of OSHA enforcement
data and then manually reviewed to
ensure the inclusion of only citations
due to heat exposure and no other
exposures (e.g., burns or explosions).
Several keywords were utilized to filter
the data for inclusion (e.g., ‘‘heat,’’ ‘‘heat
stress,’’ ‘‘heat illness,’’ ‘‘WBGT’’) and
exclusion (e.g., ‘‘explosion,’’ ‘‘flash,’’
‘‘electrical burn,’’ ‘‘fire’’). Due to
limitations of the data set on which
OSHA relied, OSHA did not have access
to violation text descriptions of citations
issued before the mid-1980s and thus
did not determine how many are related
to heat exposure prior to this time
period. Additionally, over half of the
citations from 1986–1989 are missing
violation text descriptions, which likely
resulted in an undercount of heatrelated citations.
OSHA has used its general inspection
authority (29 U.S.C. 657) to target heatrelated injuries and illnesses in various
Regional Emphasis Programs (REPs).
OSHA enforcement emphasis programs
focus the agency’s resources on
particular hazards or high-hazard
industries (see Marshall v. Barlow’s,
Inc., 436 U.S. 307, 321 (1978) (affirming
OSHA’s use of an administrative plan
containing specific neutral criteria to
focus inspections)). OSHA’s Region VI
regional office, located in Dallas, TX,
has a heat-related special REP (OSHA,
2019). This region covers Texas, New
Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and
Louisiana. OSHA’s Region IX regional
office, located in San Francisco, CA,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
also has a heat-related REP (OSHA,
2022). This region covers American
Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam,
Hawaii, Nevada, and the Northern
Mariana Islands. These REPs allow field
staff to conduct heat illness inspections
of outdoor work activities on days when
the high temperature is forecasted to be
above 80 °F.
On September 1, 2021, OSHA issued
updated Inspection Guidance for HeatRelated Hazards, which established a
new enforcement initiative to protect
employees from heat-related injuries
and illnesses while working in
hazardous hot indoor and outdoor
environments (OSHA, 2021). The
guidance provided that days when the
heat index exceeds 80 °F would be
considered heat priority days. It
announced that enforcement efforts
would be increased on heat priority
days for a variety of indoor and outdoor
industries, with the aim of identifying
and mitigating potential hazards and
preventing heat-illnesses before they
occur.
In April 2022, OSHA launched a
National Emphasis Program (NEP) to
protect employees from heat-related
hazards and resulting injuries and
illnesses in outdoor and indoor
workplaces. The NEP expanded the
agency’s ongoing heat-related injury and
illness prevention initiatives and
campaign by setting forth a targeted
enforcement component and reiterating
its compliance assistance and outreach
efforts. The NEP targets specific
industries expected to have the highest
exposures to heat-related hazards and
resulting illnesses and deaths. This
approach is intended to encourage early
interventions by employers to prevent
illnesses and deaths among workers
during high heat conditions (CPL 03–
00–024). As of June 26, 2024, OSHA has
conducted 5,038 Heat NEP Federal
inspections. More than 1,229 of these
were initiated by complaints and 117
were due to the occurrence of a fatality
or catastrophe. As a result of these
inspections, OSHA issued 56 General
Duty Clause citations and 736 Hazard
Alert Letters (HALs). Inspections
occurred across various industries (as
identified by 2-digit NAICS codes)
including construction, which had the
highest number of inspections, as well
as manufacturing, maritime, agriculture,
transportation, warehousing, food
services, waste management, and
remediation services.
On July 27, 2023, OSHA issued a heat
hazard alert to remind employers of
their obligation to protect workers
against heat injury and illness in
outdoor and indoor workplaces. The
alert highlights what employers can and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
should be doing to protect employees. It
also serves to remind employees of their
rights, including protections against
retaliation. In addition, the alert
highlights steps OSHA is currently
taking to protect workers and directs
employers, employees, and the public to
OSHA resources, including guidance
and fact sheets on heat.
OSHA’s efforts to protect employees
from hazardous heat conditions using
the General Duty Clause, although
important, have limitations leaving
many workers vulnerable to heat-related
hazards. For example, the Commission
has struggled to determine exactly what
conditions create a recognized heat
hazard under the General Duty Clause,
and has therefore suggested the
necessity of a standard (see, A.H.
Sturgill Roofing, Inc., 2019 OSHD (CCH)
¶ 33712, 2019 WL 1099857, at *2–5 and
n.8 (No. 13–0224, 2019) (‘‘The
Secretary’s failure to establish the
existence of an excessive heat hazard
here illustrates the difficulty in
addressing this issue in the absence of
an OSHA standard.’’); U.S. Postal
Service, 2023 OSHD (CCH) ¶ 33908,
2023 WL 2263313, at *3 n.7 (Nos. 16–
1713, 16–1872, 17–0023,17–0279, 2023)
(noting Commissioner Laihow’s opinion
that ‘‘A myriad of factors, such as the
geographical area where the work is
being performed and the nature of the
tasks involved, can impact’’ whether
excessive heat is present, and indicating
that a standard is therefore necessary to
define the hazard).
Under the General Duty Clause,
OSHA cannot require abatement before
proving in an enforcement proceeding
that specific workplace conditions are
hazardous; whereas a standard would
establish the existence of the hazard at
the rulemaking stage, thus allowing
OSHA to identify and require specific
abatement measures without having to
prove the existence of a hazard in each
case (see Sanderson Farms, Inc. v.
Perez, 811 F.3d 730, 735 (5th Cir. 2016)
(‘‘Since OSHA is required to determine
that there is a hazard before issuing a
standard, the Secretary is not ordinarily
required to prove the existence of a
hazard each time a standard is
enforced.’’)). Given OSHA’s burden
under the General Duty Clause, it is
currently difficult for OSHA to ensure
necessary abatement before employee
lives and health are unnecessarily
endangered. Further, under the General
Duty Clause OSHA must largely rely on
expert witness testimony to prove both
the existence of a hazard and the
availability of feasible abatement
measures that will materially reduce or
eliminate the hazard in each individual
case (see, e.g., Industrial Glass, 15 BNA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
OSHC 1594, 1992 WL 88787, at *4–7
(No. 88–348, 1992)).
Moreover, as OSHA has noted in
similar contexts, standards have the
advantage of providing greater clarity to
employers and employees of the
measures required to protect employees
and are developed with the benefit of
information gathered in the notice and
comment process (see 86 FR 32376,
32418 (Jun. 21, 2021) (COVID–19
Healthcare ETS); 56 FR 64004, 64007
(Dec. 6, 1991) (Bloodborne Pathogens
Standard)).
OSHA currently has other existing
standards that, while applicable to some
issues related to hazardous heat, have
not proven to be adequate in protecting
workers from exposure to hazardous
heat. For example, OSHA’s
Recordkeeping standard (29 CFR
1904.7) requires employers to record
and report injuries and illnesses that
meet recording criteria. Additionally,
the agency’s Sanitation standards (29
CFR 1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127,
1926.51, and 1928.110) require
employers to provide potable water
readily accessible to workers. While
these standards require that drinking
water be made available in ‘‘sufficient
amounts,’’ they do not specify
quantities, and employers are not
required to encourage workers to
frequently hydrate on hot days.
OSHA’s Safety Training and
Education standard (29 CFR 1926.21)
requires employers in the construction
industry to train employees in the
recognition, avoidance, and prevention
of unsafe conditions in their
workplaces. OSHA’s PPE standards (29
CFR 1910.132, 1915.152, 1917.95, and
1926.28) require employers to conduct a
hazard assessment to determine the
appropriate PPE to be used to protect
employees from the hazards identified
in the assessment. However, hazardous
heat is not specifically identified as a
hazard for which workers need training
or PPE, complicating the application of
these requirements to hazardous heat.
IV. Rulemaking Activities Leading to
This Proposal
OSHA has received multiple petitions
to promulgate a heat injury and illness
prevention standard, including in 2018
from Public Citizen, on behalf of
approximately 130 organizations (Public
Citizen et al., 2018). OSHA has also
been urged by members of Congress to
initiate rulemaking for a Federal heat
standard, as well as by the Attorneys
General of several States in 2023.
On October 27, 2021, OSHA
published an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) for Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70705
and Indoor Work Settings in the Federal
Register (86 FR 59309) (referred to as
‘‘the ANPRM’’ hereafter). The ANPRM
outlined key issues and challenges in
occupational heat-related injury and
illness prevention and aimed to collect
evidence, data, and information critical
to informing how OSHA proceeds in the
rulemaking process. The ANPRM
included background information on
injuries, illnesses, and fatalities due to
heat, underreporting, scope, geographic
region, and inequality in exposures and
outcomes. The ANPRM also covered
existing heat injury and illness
prevention efforts, including OSHA’s
efforts, the NIOSH criteria documents,
State standards, and other standards.
The initial public comment period was
extended and closed on January 26,
2022. In response to the ANPRM, OSHA
received 965 unique comments. The
comments covered several topics,
including the scope of a standard, heat
stress thresholds for workers across
various industries, heat acclimatization
planning, and heat exposure
monitoring, as well as the nature, types,
and effectiveness of controls that may be
required as part of a standard.
Following the publication of the
ANPRM, OSHA presented topics from
the ANPRM and updates on the heat
rulemaking to several stakeholders,
including several trade associations, the
Office of Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration’s (SBA’s Office
of Advocacy) Labor Safety Roundtable
(November 19, 2021), and NIOSH
National Occupational Research Agenda
(NORA) councils, including the
Construction Sector Council (November
17, 2021), Landscaping Safety
Workgroup (January 12, 2022), and Oil
and Gas Extraction Sector (April 7,
2022).
On May 3, 2022, OSHA held a virtual
public stakeholder meeting on the
agency’s ‘‘Initiatives to Protect Workers
from Heat-Related Hazards.’’ A total of
over 1,300 people attended the virtual
meeting, and the recorded video has
been viewed over 3,500 times (see
www.youtube.com/
watch?v=Ud29WsnsOw8) as of June
2024. The six-hour meeting provided
stakeholders an opportunity to learn
about and comment on efforts OSHA is
taking to protect workers from heatrelated hazards and ways the public can
participate in the agency’s rulemaking
process.
OSHA also established a Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention Work Group of
the National Advisory Committee on
Occupational Safety and Health
(NACOSH) to support the agency’s
rulemaking and outreach efforts. The
Work Group was tasked with reviewing
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70706
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and developing recommendations on
OSHA’s heat illness prevention
guidance materials, evaluating
stakeholder input, and developing
recommendations on potential elements
of any proposed heat injury and illness
prevention standard. On May 31, 2023,
the Work Group presented its
recommendations on potential elements
of a proposed heat injury and illness
prevention standard for consideration
by the full NACOSH committee. The
Work Group recommended that any
proposed heat injury and illness
prevention standard include: a written
exposure control plan/heat illness
prevention plan; training;
environmental monitoring; workplace
control measures; acclimatization;
worker participation; and emergency
response (Document ID OSHA–2023–
0003–0007). After deliberations,
NACOSH amended the report to ask
OSHA to include a model written plan
and then submitted its
recommendations to the Secretary of
Labor (Document ID OSHA–2023–0003–
0012).
As an initial rulemaking step, OSHA
convened a Small Business Advocacy
Review Panel (SBAR Panel) on August
25, 2023, in accordance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Act (SBREFA) of 1996. This SBAR Panel
consisted of members from OSHA,
SBA’s Office of Advocacy, and the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the White House
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The SBAR Panel identifies
individual representatives of affected
small entities, termed small entity
representatives (SERs), which includes
small businesses, small local
government entities, and non-profits.
This process enabled OSHA, with the
assistance of SBA’s Office of Advocacy
and OIRA, to obtain advice and
recommendations from SERs about the
potential impacts of the regulatory
options outlined in the regulatory
framework and about additional options
or alternatives to the regulatory
framework that may alleviate those
impacts while still meeting the
objectives and requirements of the OSH
Act.
The SBAR Panel hosted six online
meetings on September 9, 12, 13, 14, 18,
and 19, 2023, with participation from a
total of 82 SERs from a wide range of
industries. A final report containing the
findings, advice, and recommendations
of the SBAR Panel was submitted to the
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health on
November 3, 2023, to help inform the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
agency’s decision making with respect
to this rulemaking (Document ID
OSHA–2021–0009–1059).
In accordance with 29 CFR parts 1911
and 1912, OSHA presented to the
Advisory Committee on Construction
Safety and Health (ACCSH) on its
framework for a proposed rule for heat
injury and illness prevention in outdoor
and indoor work settings on April 24,
2024. The Committee then passed
unanimously a motion recommending
that OSHA proceed expeditiously with
proposing a standard on heat injury and
illness prevention. The Committee also
recommended that OSHA consider the
feedback and questions discussed by
Committee members during the meeting
in formulating the proposed rule (see
the minutes from the meeting, Docket
No. 2024–0002). OSHA has considered
the Committee’s feedback in the
development of this proposal.
In accordance with Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments, 65 FR
67249 (Nov. 6, 2000), OSHA held a
listening session with Tribal
representatives regarding this Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings rulemaking
on May 15, 2024. OSHA provided an
overview of the rulemaking effort and
sought comment on what, if any, tribal
implications would result from the
rulemaking. A summary of the meeting
and list of attendees can be viewed in
the docket (DOL, 2024a).
D. Other Standards
Various other organizations have also
either identified the need for standards
to prevent occupational heat-related
injury and illness or published their
own standards. In 2024, the American
National Standards Institute/American
Society of Safety Professionals A10
Committee (ANSI/ASSP) published a
consensus standard on heat stress
management in construction and
demolition operations. The
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) also has a
standard for evaluating heat stress: ISO
7243: Ergonomics of the thermal
environments—Assessment of heat
stress using the WBGT (wet bulb globe
temperature) index (ISO, 2017). ISO
7243 uses WBGT values, along with
metabolic rate, to assess hot
environments, similar to ACGIH and
NIOSH recommendations. Additional
ISO standards address predicting sweat
rate and core temperature (ISO 7933),
and determining metabolic rate (ISO
8996), physiological strain (ISO 9886),
and thermal characteristics for clothing
(ISO 9920). In 2021, the American
Society for Testing and Materials
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(ASTM) finalized its Standard Guide for
Managing Heat Stress and Heat Strain in
Foundries (E3279–21) which establishes
‘‘best practices for recognizing and
managing occupational heat stress and
heat strain in foundry environments.’’
The standard outlines employer
responsibilities and recommends
elements for a ‘‘Heat Stress and Heat
Strain Management Program’’ (ASTM,
2021).
ACGIH has identified TLVs for heat
stress (ACGIH, 2023). The TLVs utilize
WBGT and take into consideration
metabolic rate or workload categories.
Additionally, ACGIH provides clothing
adjustment factors which are added to
the measured WBGT for certain types of
work clothing to account for the
impaired thermal regulation.
The U.S. Armed Forces has developed
extensive heat-related illness prevention
and management strategies. The Warrior
Heat and Exertion Related Events
Collaborative is a tri-service group of
military leaders focused on clinical,
educational, and research efforts related
to exercise and exertional heat-related
illnesses and medical emergencies
(HPRC, 2023). The U.S. Army has a Heat
Center at Fort Benning which focuses on
management, research, and prevention
of heat-related illness and death (Galer,
2019). In 2023, the U.S. Army updated
its Training and Doctrine Command
(TRADOC) Regulation 350–29
addressing heat and cold casualties. The
regulation includes requirements for
rest and water consumption according
to specific WBGT levels and work
intensity (Department of the Army,
2023). The U.S. Navy has developed
Physiological Heat Exposure Limit
curves that are based on metabolic and
environmental heat loads and represent
the maximum allowable heat exposure
limits, which were most recently
updated in 2023. The Navy monitors
WBGT and has guidelines based on
these measurements, with physical
training diminishing as WBGTs increase
and all nonessential outdoor activity
stopped when WBGTs exceed 90 °F
(Department of the Navy, 2023). The
U.S. Marine Corps follows the Navy’s
guidelines for implementation of the
Marine Corps Heat Injury Prevention
Program (Commandant of the Marine
Corps, 2002). In 2022, the U.S. Army
and U.S. Air Force issued an update to
their technical heat stress bulletin,
which outlines measures to prevent
indoor and outdoor heat-related illness
in soldiers. The bulletin includes
recommended acclimatization planning,
work-rest cycles, fluid and electrolyte
replacement, and limitations on work
based on WBGT (Department of the
Army, 2022).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
an ambient temperature of 80 °F.
Washington’s rule also relies on ambient
temperature readings combined with
considerations for the breathability of
workers’ clothing. Oregon’s rule uses a
heat index 80 °F as a trigger.
California, Washington, Colorado, and
Oregon all have additional protections
that are triggered by high heat. However,
they differ as to the trigger for these
additional protections. In California,
high heat protections are triggered at an
ambient temperature reading of 95 °F
(and only apply in certain industries). In
Washington, high heat protections are
triggered at an ambient temperature
reading of 90 °F. In Colorado, additional
protections are triggered at an ambient
temperature reading of 95 °F or by other
factors such as unhealthy air quality,
length of workday, heaviness of clothing
or gear, and acclimatization status.
These additional protections only apply
to the agricultural industry. Finally, in
Oregon, high heat protections are
triggered at a heat index of 90 °F.
All the State standards require
training for employees and supervisors.
As of April 2024, five States have
promulgated heat standards requiring
employers in various industries and
workplace settings to implement
protections to reduce the risk of heatrelated injuries and illnesses for their
employees: California, Minnesota,
Oregon, Washington, and Colorado. In
addition, Maryland and California are
currently engaged in rulemaking. State
standards differ in the scope of coverage
(see tables III–1 and 2). For example,
Minnesota’s standard covers only
indoor workplaces. California and
Washington standards cover only
outdoor workplaces, although
California’s proposal would include
coverage of indoor workplaces. Oregon’s
rule covers both indoor and outdoor
workplaces. State rules also differ in the
methods used for triggering protections
against hazardous heat. Minnesota’s
standard considers the type of work
being performed (light, moderate, or
heavy) and provides WBGT trigger
levels based on the type of work
activity. California’s heat-illness
prevention protections go into effect at
70707
All the State standards, except for
Minnesota, require employers to
provide at least one quart of water per
hour for each employee, require some
form of emergency response plan,
include provisions related to
acclimatization for workers, and require
access to shaded break areas.
Washington and Oregon require that
employers provide training in a
language that the workers understand.
Similarly, California’s standard requires
that employers create a written heatillness prevention plan in English as
well as in whatever other language is
understood by the majority of workers at
a given workplace. California also
requires close monitoring of new
employees for the first fourteen days
and monitoring of all employees during
a heat wave. Table III–1 below provides
an overview of the provisions included
in the existing and proposed State
standards on heat injury and illness
prevention. Table III–2 provides an
overview of the additional provisions
required when the high heat trigger is
met or exceeded.
TABLE III–1—INITIAL HEAT TRIGGERS AND PROVISIONS IN STATE HEAT STANDARDS
Shade or
cool-down
means
Provision
of water
Threshold
Rest breaks
if needed
Emergency
response
Acclimatization
Training
Heat
illness
prevention
plan
Observation/
supervision
General
California: Outdoor ....
Washington: Outdoor
Colorado: Agriculture
California (proposal):
Indoor.
Maryland (proposal):
Indoor & Outdoor.
Minnesota: 2 Indoor ....
Oregon: Indoor & Outdoor.
80 °F (Ambient) 1 .......
80 °F (Ambient), All
other clothing;
52 °F, Non-breathable clothes.
80 °F (Ambient) .........
82 °F (Ambient) .........
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• ...............
• (accident
prevention).
.....................
.....................
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..................
• ...............
•
.....................
80 °F (Heat Index) .....
•
•
....................
•
•
•
• ...............
.....................
86 °F (WBGT), Light
work; 80 °F, Moderate work; 77 °F,
Heavy work.
80 °F (Heat Index) .....
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
•
..................
.....................
•
•
....................
•
•
•
• ...............
.....................
1 Some provisions, including water, emergency response, training, and heat illness prevention plan, apply to covered employers regardless of the temperature
threshold.
2 Minnesota uses a 2-hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit rather than a trigger.
TABLE III–2—HIGH HEAT TRIGGERS AND ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IN STATE HEAT STANDARDS
Observation/supervision
Pre-shift
meetings
Assessment
and control
measures 1
•
....................
•
....................
....................
....................
....................................................
• .................................................
• .................................................
covered in general provisions
above.
....................................................
....................
•
Threshold
Work-rest schedule
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Additional High Heat Provisions
Outdoor 2
California:
..................
Washington: Outdoor ................
Colorado: Agriculture .................
California (proposal): Indoor ......
Maryland (proposal): Indoor &
Outdoor.
Oregon: Indoor & Outdoor ........
95 °F (Ambient) .........................
90 °F (Ambient) .........................
95 °F (Ambient) or other condition 3.
87 °F (Ambient or Heat Index)
or other conditions 4.
90 °F (Heat Index) .....................
• (only agriculture) .....................
• .................................................
• .................................................
• .................................................
• .................................................
....................
....................
90 °F (Heat Index) .....................
• .................................................
• .................................................
....................
....................
1 Assessment
and control measures include measuring temperature and heat index, identifying and evaluating all other environmental risk factors for heat illness,
and using specified control measures to minimize the risk of heat illness.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:15 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70708
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
2 High heat procedures apply in agriculture; construction; landscaping; oil and gas extraction; transportation or delivery of agricultural products, construction materials or other heavy materials, except for employment that consists of operating an air-conditioned vehicle and does not include loading or unloading.
3 Other conditions include unhealthy air quality, shifts over 12 hours, heavy clothing or gear required, or the employee is new or returning from absence.
4 Other conditions include wearing clothing that restricts heat removal, or working in a high radiant heat area, when the ambient temperature is at or above 82 °F.
IV. Health Effects
A. Introduction
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Health Effects of Occupational Heat
Exposure
Exposure to workplace heat can be
seriously detrimental to workers’ health
and safety and, in some cases, can be
fatal. Workplace heat contributes to heat
stress, which is a person’s total heat
load (NIOSH, 2016) from the following
sources combined: (1) heat from the
environment, including heat generated
by equipment or machinery; (2)
metabolic heat generated through body
movement, which is proportional to
one’s relative level of exertion (Sawka et
al., 1993; Astrand 1960); and (3) heat
retained due to clothing or personal
protective equipment (PPE), which is
highly dependent on the breathability of
the clothing and PPE worn (Bernard et
al., 2017). Heat is routinely an
occupation-specific risk because, for
example, workers may experience
greater heat stress than non-workers,
particularly when they are required to
work through shifts with prolonged heat
exposure, complete tasks that require
physical exertion, and/or their
employers do not take adequate steps to
protect them from exposure to
hazardous heat. In addition, many work
operations require the use of PPE. PPE
can increase heat stress and can reduce
workers’ heat tolerance by decreasing
the body’s ability to cool down. Workers
may also face pressure, or
incentivization through pay structures
(e.g., piece-rate, bonuses), to work
through hazardous heat. Pressure to
produce results and be seen as a good
worker can have a direct impact on
worker self-care choices that impact
health (Wadsworth et al., 2019). Pay
structures and production quotas
intended to motivate workers may also
compromise worker safety (Iglesias-Rios
et al., 2023). These pressures can
increase their risk of heat-related injury
and illness (Billikopf and Norton, 1992;
Johansson et al., 2010; Spector et al.,
2015; Pan et al., 2021). The body’s
response to heat stress is called heat
strain (NIOSH, 2016). As the heat stress
a person experiences increases, the body
attempts to cool itself by releasing heat
into the surrounding environment. If the
body begins to acquire heat faster than
it can release it, the body will store heat.
As stored heat accumulates, the body
can show signs of excessive heat strain,
such as increased core temperature and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heart rate, as well as symptoms of heat
strain, such as sweating, dizziness, or
nausea.
Two large meta-analyses (n=2,409 and
n=11,582) 1 have confirmed that
occupational heat exposure is associated
with both signs and symptoms of heat
strain (Ioannou et al., 2022; Flouris et
al., 2018). In one, the authors found a
high prevalence of heat strain (35%)
among workers in hot conditions,
defined by the authors as WBGT greater
than 26 °C (78.8 °F); they also found that
workers in hot conditions were four
times more likely to experience signs
and symptoms of heat strain than
workers in more moderate conditions
(Flouris et al., 2018).
II. Literature Review for Health Effects
Section
OSHA conducted a non-systematic
review of the medical and scientific
literature to identify evidence on the
relationship between heat exposure and
illnesses and death. OSHA’s literature
review focused on meta-analyses,
systematic reviews, and studies cited in
NIOSH’s Criteria for a Recommended
Standard: Occupational Exposure to
Heat and Hot Environments, published
in 2016. OSHA separately searched for
additional meta-analyses and systematic
reviews that were not cited in the
NIOSH Criteria document, including
those that were published after the
document was released (i.e., 2016 and
on).
OSHA also reviewed sentinel
epidemiological evidence including
observational, experimental, and
randomized controlled studies. OSHA
primarily reviewed epidemiological
studies focusing on worker populations,
athletes, and military members, but also
included studies in non-worker
populations where appropriate. For
example, when there was limited
occupation-specific research or data for
some heat-related health effects, OSHA
sometimes considered general
population studies as they relate to
understanding physiological
mechanisms of heat-related illness,
severity of an illness, and prognosis. In
addition to the evidence of heat-related
illnesses and deaths, OSHA reviewed a
1 In the Health Effects section, OSHA refers to
statistics that were reported by authors when
describing results from their research studies. These
include the sample size (n), the odds ratio (OR), the
confidence interval (CI), and the p-value (p). These
statistics provide information about effect size,
error, and statistical significance.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
large body of evidence that evaluated
the association of occupational heat
exposure with workplace injuries such
as falls, collisions, and other accidents.
OSHA also reviewed evidence regarding
individual factors such as age,
medication use, and certain medical
conditions that may affect one’s risk for
heat-related health effects.
III. Summary
The best available evidence in the
scientific and medical literature, as
summarized in this Health Effects
section, demonstrates that occupational
heat exposure can result in death;
illnesses, including heat stroke, heat
exhaustion, heat syncope,
rhabdomyolysis, heat cramps,
hyponatremia, heat edema, and heat
rash; and heat-related injuries,
including falls, collisions, and other
workplace accidents.
B. General Mechanisms of Heat-Related
Health Effects
This section briefly describes the
mechanisms of heat-related health
effects, i.e., how the body’s
physiological responses to heat
exposure can lead to the heat-related
health effects identified in OSHA’s
literature review. More detailed
information about the mechanisms
underpinning each specific heat-related
health effect is described in the relevant
subsections that follow.
As explained above, occupational
heat exposure contributes to heat stress.
The resulting bodily responses are
collectively referred to as heat strain
(Cramer and Jay, 2016). The bodily
responses included in heat strain serve
to decrease stored heat by increasing
heat loss to the environment to maintain
a stable body temperature (NIOSH,
2016). When the brain recognizes that
the body is storing heat, it activates the
autonomic nervous system to initiate
cooling (Kellogg et al., 1995; Wyss et al.,
1974). Blood is shunted towards the
skin and vasodilation begins, meaning
that the blood vessels near the skin’s
surface become wider, thereby
increasing blood flow near the surface of
the skin (Kamijo et al., 2005; Hough and
Ballantyne, 1899). The autonomic
nervous system also triggers the body’s
sweat response, in which sweat glands
release water to wet the skin (Roddie et
al., 1957; Grant and Holling, 1938).
These processes allow the body to cool
in four ways: (1) radiation, i.e., when
heat is released directly into the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
surrounding air; (2) convection, i.e.,
when there is air movement that moves
heat away from the body; (3)
evaporation, i.e., when sweat on the
skin diffuses into surrounding air (as
clothing/PPE permits) and (4)
conduction, i.e., when heat is directly
transferred through contact with a
cooler surface (e.g., wearing an icecontaining vest (Cramer and Jay, 2016;
Leon and Kenefick, 2012)).
Importantly, the extent of heat release
through radiation, convection, and
evaporation depends on environmental
conditions such as the speed of air flow,
temperature, and relative humidity
(Clifford et al., 1959; Brebner et al.,
1958). For example, when relative
humidity is high, sweat is less likely to
evaporate off the skin, which
significantly reduces the cooling effect
of evaporation. Additionally, when
sweat remains on the skin and irritates
the sweat glands, it can cause a
condition known as heat rash, whereby
itchy red clusters of pimples or blisters
develop on the skin (DiBeneditto and
Worobec, 1985; Sulzberger and Griffin,
1968).
While the purpose of the sweat
response is to cool the body, in doing
so, it can deplete the body’s stores of
water and electrolytes (e.g., sodium
[Na], potassium [K], chloride [Cl],
calcium [Ca], and magnesium [Mg]) that
are essential for normal bodily function
(Shirreffs and Maughan, 1997). The
condition resulting from abnormally
low sodium levels is known as
hyponatremia. When stores of
electrolytes are depleted, painful muscle
spasms known as heat cramps can occur
(Kamijo and Nose, 2006). Additionally,
depletion of the body’s stored water
causes dehydration, which is known to
reduce the body’s circulating blood
volume (Trangmar and GonzalezAlonso, 2017; Dill and Costill, 1974).
During vasodilation that happens as
the body attempts to cool, blood can
pool in areas of the body that are most
subject to gravity, and fluid can seep
from blood vessels causing noticeable
swelling under the skin (known as heat
edema). Upright standing would further
encourage blood to pool in the legs, and
thus, the heart has an even lower blood
volume available for circulation (Smit et
al., 1999). A large reduction in
circulating blood volume will lead to (1)
a continued rise in core body
temperature, and (2) reduced blood flow
to the brain, muscles, and organs. A rise
in core body temperature and reduced
blood flow to the brain can cause
neurological disturbances, such as loss
of consciousness, which are
characteristic of heat stroke and heat
syncope (Wilson et al., 2006; Van
Lieshout et al., 2003). A rise in core
body temperature and reduced blood
flow to muscles can also cause extreme
muscle fatigue (to the point of collapse)
and muscle cell damage during exertion,
which are characteristic of heat
exhaustion and rhabdomyolysis,
respectively (Torres et al., 2015; Nybo et
al., 2014). Finally, a rise in core body
temperature and reduced blood flow to
organs can damage multiple vital organs
(such as the heart, liver, and kidneys),
which is often observed in heat stroke
(Crandall et al., 2008; O’Donnell and
Clowes, 1972). Heat stroke and
rhabdomyolysis can lead to death if not
treated properly and promptly.
C. Identifying Cases of Heat-Related
Health Effects
In its review of the scientific and
medical literature on the health effects
of occupational heat exposure, OSHA
found several studies that relied upon
coding systems, in which medical
providers or other public health
professionals identify fatalities and nonfatal cases of various illnesses and
injuries, including heat-related illnesses
and injuries (HRIs). The medical and
scientific communities use data from
these coding systems to study the
incidence and prevalence of illnesses
and injuries, including HRIs. In both
this Health Effects section and Section
V., Risk Assessment, OSHA relied on
several studies that make use of data
from these coding systems. A brief
summary of each of the major coding
systems is provided below.
I. International Statistical Classification
of Diseases and Related Health Problems
(ICD) Codes
The International Statistical
Classification of Diseases and Related
Health Problems (ICD) System is under
the purview of the World Health
Organization (WHO), an international
agency that, as the leading authority on
health and disease, regularly publishes
evidence-based guidelines to advance
clinical practice and public health
policy. The ICD System harmonizes the
diagnosis of disease across many
countries, and ICD codes are used
routinely in the U.S. healthcare system
by medical personnel to record
diagnoses in patients’ medical records,
as well as to identify cause of death.
These codes are utilized as part of a
standardized system for recording
diagnoses, as well as organizing and
collecting data into public health
surveillance systems. Each ICD code is
a series of letters and/or numbers that
corresponds to a highly specific medical
diagnosis. Healthcare providers may
record multiple ICD codes if an
individual presents with multiple
diagnoses. The ICD system has multiple
codes that medical personnel can use
when diagnosing HRIs.
The ICD system was first developed in
the 18th century and was adopted under
the purview of the World Health
Organization (WHO) in 1948 (Hirsch et
al., 2016). Since then, the ICD system
has been revised 11 times—ICD–11 was
released in 2022. However, because the
ICD–11 system has not yet been
implemented in the United States, many
of the epidemiological studies cited
throughout this Health Effects section
used the ICD–9 and ICD–10 systems to
survey heat-related deaths and HRIs.
Table IV–1 provides a list of heat-related
ICD–9 and ICD–10 codes.
TABLE IV—1—ICD–9 AND ICD–10 CODES FOR HEAT-RELATED HEALTH EFFECTS *
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
ICD–9 code
ICD–10 code equivalent
992 Effects of heat and light ..................................................................
992.0 Heatstroke and sunstroke ............................................................
992.1 Heat syncope ...............................................................................
992.2 Heat cramps .................................................................................
992.3 Heat exhaustion, anhydrotic ........................................................
992.4 Heat exhaustion due to salt depletion .........................................
992.5 Heat exhaustion, unspecified .......................................................
992.6 Heat fatigue, transient ..................................................................
992.7 Heat edema .................................................................................
992.8 Other effects of heat and light .....................................................
992.9 Effects of heat and light, unspecified ..........................................
E900 Accident caused by excessive heat .............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
T67 Effects of heat and light.
T67.0 Heatstroke and sunstroke.
T67.1 Heat syncope.
T67.2 Heat cramp.
T67.3 Heat exhaustion, anhydrotic.
T67.4 Heat exhaustion due to salt depletion.
T67.5 Heat exhaustion, unspecified.
T67.6 Heat fatigue, transient.
T67.7 Heat edema.
T67.8 Other effects of heat and light.
T67.9 Effects of heat and light, unspecified.
NA.
Sfmt 4702
70709
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70710
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE IV—1—ICD–9 AND ICD–10 CODES FOR HEAT-RELATED HEALTH EFFECTS *—Continued
ICD–9 code
E900.0
E900.1
E900.9
ICD–10 code equivalent
Accident caused by excessive heat due to weather conditions
Accidents due to excessive heat of man-made origin ..............
Accidents due to excessive heat of unspecified origin .............
X30 Exposure to excessive natural heat.
W92 Exposure to excessive heat of man-made origin.
X30 Exposure to excessive natural heat.
Note: The above heat-related codes exclude X32 Exposure to sunlight and W89 Exposure to man-made radiation, among others.
* These ICD codes are specific to heat as indicated by the names of the codes. There are additional codes that can be associated with diagnosed heat illness but may not be specific to heat-related illness which are not included here but may be included in text where relevant (e.g.,
M62.82 for rhabdomyolysis and E87.1 for hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia).
Various surveillance systems exist to
track documentation of ICD codes. For
example, the CDC leverages ICD–10
codes to collect nearly real-time data on
heat-related deaths and HRIs through
the National Syndromic Surveillance
System (NSSP). The CDC also uses ICD–
10 codes to collect annual data on heatrelated deaths and HRIs, then reports
these data via the National Vital
Statistics System (NVSS) and National
Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).
Additionally, all branches of the U.S.
Armed Forces (i.e., Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps) use ICD–10
codes to document HRIs among service
members in the Defense Medical
Surveillance System (DMSS). The US
Army also uses ICD–10 codes to
document HRIs in the Total Army Injury
and Health Outcomes Database
(TAIHOD) (Bell et al., 2004).
II. Occupational Illness and Injury
Classification System (OIICS) Codes
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) is a Federal agency, housed in the
Department of Labor, that collects and
analyzes data on the U.S. economy and
workforce. In 1992, BLS developed the
Occupational Illness and Injury
Classification System (OIICS) to
harmonize reporting of injuries and
illnesses that affect U.S. workers. The
OIICS is similar to the ICD system. Each
OIICS code is a series of numbers that
specifies a diagnosis (referred to as the
nature of an illness or injury, or a
‘‘nature code’’) and event(s) leading to
an illness or injury (referred to as an
‘‘event code’’). OIICS was updated in
2010 (Version 2.0), and again in 2022
(Version 3.0); Version 3.0 is the most up
to date version (https://www.bls.gov/iif/
definitions/occupational-injuries-andillnesses-classification-manual.htm;
BLS, 2023e). The OIICS system has
multiple codes that can be used when
identifying occupational HRIs. Table
IV–2 provides a list of heat-related
OIICS codes (nature and event codes).
TABLE IV—2—OIICS CODES (VERSION 3.0) FOR HEAT-RELATED HEALTH EFFECTS †
Nature Codes:
172 Effects of heat and light.
1720 Effects of heat—unspecified.
1721 Heat stroke, syncope.
1722 Heat exhaustion, fatigue.
1729 Effects of heat—not elsewhere classified.
2893 Prickly heat, heat rash, and other disorders of the sweat glands including ‘‘miliaria rubra’’.
Event Codes:
53 Exposure to temperature extremes.
530 Exposure to temperature extremes—unspecified.
531 Exposure to environmental heat.
5310 Exposure to environmental heat—unspecified.
5311 Exposure to environmental heat—indoor.
5312 Exposure to environmental heat—outdoor.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
† Some of the data OSHA relies on uses older versions of OIICS codes (Versions 1 and 2) but the major categories for heat-related incidents
did not change significantly between versions.
Through a combination of survey staff
and a specialized automated coding
system, BLS applies OIICS codes to data
collected through their worker safety
and health surveillance systems, the
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries
(CFOI) and the Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (SOII), to identify
and document occupational heat-related
deaths and occupational HRIs,
respectively. Researchers have also
relied on this system for identifying
occupational HRIs (e.g., Spector et al.,
2016). However, BLS data does not
currently specify discrete codes for all
HRIs described in this health effects
section. The CFOI is a cooperative
program between the Federal
Government and the States that relies on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
various administrative records,
including death certificates, to
accurately produce counts of fatal work
injuries (BLS, 2012). The CFOI
examines all cases marked ‘‘At work’’
on the death certificate, and the CFOI
database relies on the death certificate
(among other sources) to ascertain the
cause(s) of death. Further details about
BLS reporting using OIICS codes, as
well as rates of HRIs, can be found in
Section V., Risk Assessment.
III. Limitations
A limitation to relying on these
coding systems to identify heat-related
fatalities and HRIs is underreporting.
Numerous studies have found that HRIs
are likely vastly underreported (see
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Section V., Risk Assessment). Reasons
for the likely underreporting include
underreporting of illness and injuries by
workers to their employers (Kyung et
al., 2023), underreporting of injuries and
illnesses by employers to BLS and
OSHA (Wuellner and Phipps, 2018;
Fagan and Hodgson, 2017),
underutilization of workers’
compensation insurance (Fan et al.,
2006; Bonauto et al., 2010), influence of
structural factors and work culture on
workers perceptions about seeking help
(Wadsworth et al., 2019; Iglesias-Rios,
2023), and difficulties with determining
heat-related causes of death (e.g., Luber
et al., 2006; Pradhan et al., 2019). As a
result, there are likely many heat-related
fatalities and cases of HRIs that are not
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
captured in these coding systems. For a
more detailed discussion of
underreporting, see Section V., Risk
Assessment.
IV. Summary
As demonstrated by these coding
systems, in which medical providers or
other public health professionals assign
one or more codes to identify a heatrelated fatality or HRI, it is well
accepted in the medical and scientific
communities that heat exposure,
including occupational heat exposure,
can result in death and HRIs. Indeed, in
its review of the best available scientific
and medical literature on the health
effects of occupational heat exposure,
OSHA identified several studies that
relied upon data from these coding
systems to determine the incidence or
prevalence of heat-related deaths and
HRIs in workers. OSHA relies on these
studies in both this Health Effects
section and Section V., Risk
Assessment, of this preamble to the
proposed rule.
D. Heat-Related Deaths
I. Introduction
Heat is the deadliest weather
phenomenon in the United States
(NWS, 2022). Heat as a cause of death
is widely recognized in the medical and
scientific communities. Studies
investigating relationships between heat
and mortality have long demonstrated
positive associations between heat
exposure and increased all-cause
mortality (e.g., Weinberger et al., 2020;
Basu and Samet, 2002; Whitman et al.,
1997). As explained below, the
connection between heat exposure, the
body’s physiological responses, and
death (i.e., heat-related death
mechanisms) is clearly established.
Exposure to occupational heat can be
fatal. According to BLS’s CFOI,
occupational heat exposure has killed
1,042 U.S. workers between 1992–2022
(BLS, 2024c).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Death caused by exposure to heat can
occur in occupational settings if the
worker’s body is not able to adequately
cool in response to heat exposure or if
treatment for symptoms of heat-related
illness is not provided promptly. Nearly
all body systems can be negatively
affected by heat exposure. Mora et al.
(2017) systematically reviewed
mechanistic studies on heat-related
deaths and identified five harmful
physiological mechanisms triggered by
heat exposure that can lead to death:
ischemia (inadequate blood flow), heat
cytotoxicity (damage to and breakdown
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
of cells), inflammatory response
(inflammation that disrupts cell and
organ function), disseminated
intravascular coagulation (widespread
dysfunction of blood clotting
mechanisms), and rhabdomyolysis
(breakdown of muscle tissue). These
mechanisms, with the exception of
rhabdomyolysis, are associated with the
development of heat stroke.
Rhabdomyolysis, which is a potentially
fatal illness resulting from the
breakdown of muscle tissue, can also
occur in conjunction with or in the
absence of heat stroke. For a more
detailed discussion on rhabdomyolysis,
see Section IV.H., Rhabdomyolysis.
Mora et al. (2017) also identified seven
vital organs that can be critically
impacted by heat exposure—the brain,
heart, kidneys, lungs, pancreas,
intestines, and liver. Across the five
identified mechanisms and seven vital
organs, Mora et al. (2017) found medical
evidence for twenty-seven pathways
whereby physiological mechanisms
triggered by heat exposure could lead to
organ failure and fatality.
The most common cause of heatrelated occupational deaths is heat
stroke. Heat stroke is a potentially fatal
dysregulation of multiple physiological
processes and organ systems resulting in
widespread organ damage. Heat stroke
is typically marked by significant
elevation in core body temperature and
cognitive impairment due to central
nervous system damage. The
physiological mechanisms involved in
the development and progression of
heat stroke are discussed in more detail
in Section IV.E., Heat Stroke.
III. Determining Heat as a Cause of
Death
The identification of deaths caused by
heat exposure can take place in a few
different ways. Healthcare professionals
may identify heat-related deaths in
medical settings. For example, a heatrelated death may be identified if an
individual experiencing heat stroke
presents to an emergency room and then
later dies. The heat-related nature of the
death should be documented by the
healthcare professional in the chief
complaint field during medical history
taking and selection of relevant ICD
diagnosis codes. The ICD system allows
for identification of heat as either an
underlying cause of death or a
significant contributing condition. The
ICD–10 instruction manual defines
underlying cause as ‘‘(a) the disease or
injury which initiated the train of
morbid events leading directly to death,
or (b) the circumstances of the accident
or violence which produced the fatal
injury’’ (WHO, 2016, p. 31). A
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70711
significant contributing condition is
defined as a condition that ‘‘contributed
to the fatal outcome, but was not related
to the disease or condition directly
causing death’’ (WHO, 2004, p. 24).
Medical examiners or coroners can
also identify heat as a cause of death or
significant condition contributing to
death during death investigations,
which should be noted on the deceased
individual’s death certificate. The
National Association of Medical
Examiners (NAME), a professional
organization for medical examiners,
forensic pathologists, and medicolegal
affiliates and administrators, defines
‘‘heat-related death’’ as ‘‘a death in
which exposure to high ambient
temperature either caused the death or
significantly contributed to it’’
(Donoghue et al., 1997). This definition
was developed in an effort to
standardize the way in which heatrelated deaths were identified and
documented on death certificates.
According to the NAME definition,
cause is ascertained based on
circumstances of the death, investigative
reports of high environmental
temperature (e.g., a known heat wave),
or a pre-death temperature ≥105 °F.
Cause is also indicated in cases where
the person may have a lower body
temperature due to attempted cooling
measures, but where the individual had
a history of mental status changes and
specific toxicological findings of
elevated muscle and liver enzymes.
Heat may be designated as a ‘‘significant
contributing condition’’ if: (1)
‘‘antemortem body temperature cannot
be established but the environmental
temperature at the time of collapse was
high’’; and/or (2) heat stress exacerbated
a pre-existing disease, in which case
heat and the pre-existing disease would
be listed as the cause and significant
contributing condition, respectively, or
vice versa. Importantly, Donoghue et al.
note ‘‘The diagnosis of heat-related
death is based principally on
investigative information; autopsy
findings are nonspecific.’’ (Donoghue et
al., 1997). While this definition is the
official definition of this professional
organization, other definitions or
processes for determining whether or
not a death is heat-related may be used.
Additionally, there are processes in
place to identify and document deaths
that are work-related. Death certificates
include a field that can be checked for
‘‘injury at work’’ (Russell and Conroy,
1991). Further, work-related fatalities
due to heat are identified and
documented through the CFOI (for more
details, see Section IV.C., Overview of
ICD and OIICS Codes for Heat-Related
Health Effects).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70712
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
IV. Occupational Heat-Related Deaths
E. Heat Stroke
Occupational heat exposure has led to
worker fatalities in both indoor and
outdoor work settings and across a
variety of industries, occupations, and
job tasks (Petitti et al., 2013; Arbury et
al., 2014; Gubernot et al., 2015; NIOSH,
2016; Harduar Morano and Watkins,
2017). BLS’s CFOI identified 1,042 U.S.
worker deaths due to heat exposure
between 1992 and 2022, with an average
of 34 fatalities per year during that
period (BLS, 2024c). Between 2011 and
2022, BLS reports 479 worker deaths
(BLS, 2024c). During the latest three
years for which BLS reports data (2020–
2022), there was an average of 45 workrelated deaths due to exposure to
environmental heat per year (BLS,
2024c). However, for the reasons
explained in Section V., Risk
Assessment, these statistics likely do
not capture the true magnitude and
prevalence of heat-related fatalities
because of underreporting.
There are numerous case studies
documenting the circumstances under
which occupational heat exposure led to
death among workers. For example, in
three NIOSH Fatality Assessment and
Control Evaluations (FACE)
investigations of worker fatalities,
workers died of heat stroke after not
receiving prompt treatment upon
symptom onset (NIOSH, 2004; NIOSH,
2007; NIOSH, 2015). Another case
report of a farmworker who died due to
heat stroke indicates that confusion the
worker experienced as a result of heat
exposure may have played a role in his
ability to seek help (Luginbuhl et al.,
2008). Additional case reports show
workers have collapsed and later died
while working alone, such as in mail
delivery (Shaikh, 2023), and that worker
distress has been interpreted as drug use
as opposed to symptoms of heat illness
(Alsharif, 2023).
I. Introduction
Among HRIs, the most serious and
deadly illness from occupational heat
exposure is heat stroke. NIOSH (2016)
defines heat stroke as ‘‘an acute medical
emergency caused by exposure to heat
from an excessive rise in body
temperature [above 41.1 °C (106 °F)] and
failure of the [body’s] temperatureregulating mechanism.’’ When this
happens, an individual’s central
nervous system is affected, which can
result in a sudden and sustained loss of
consciousness preceded by symptoms
including vertigo, nausea, headache,
cerebral dysfunction, bizarre behavior,
and excessive body temperature (NIOSH
2016).
Because progression of symptoms
varies and involves central nervous
system function, it may be difficult for
individuals, or those they are with, to
know when they are experiencing
serious heat illness or to understand
that they need urgent medical care
(Alsharif, 2023). If not treated promptly,
early symptoms of heat stroke may
progress to seizures, coma, and death
(Bouchama et al., 2022). Thus, heat
stroke is often referred to as a lifethreatening form of hyperthermia (i.e.,
elevated core body temperature) because
it can cause damage to multiple organs
such as the liver and kidneys. Of note,
the term ‘‘stroke’’ in ‘‘heat stroke’’ is a
misnomer in that it does not involve a
blockage or hemorrhage of blood flow to
the brain.
There are two types of heat stroke:
classic heat stroke (CHS) and exertional
heat stroke (EHS). CHS can occur
without any activity or physical
exertion, whereas EHS occurs as a result
of physical activity. CHS typically
occurs in environmental conditions
where ambient temperature and
humidity are high and is most often
reported during heat waves (Bouchama
et al., 2022). It is most likely to affect
young children and the elderly (Laitano
et al., 2019). Studies have found that
EHS can occur with any amount of
physical exertion, even within the first
60 minutes of exertion (Epstein and
Yanovich, 2019; Garcia et al., 2022).
Additionally, EHS can occur in healthy
individuals who would otherwise be
considered low risk performing physical
activity, regardless of hot or cool
environmental conditions (Periard et al.,
2022; Epstein et al., 1999).
Cases of heat stroke can be identified
in a few ways. Medical personnel who
make a formal diagnosis of heat stroke
record the corresponding ICD code in
the patient’s medical record. Medical
examiners also identify heat stroke as a
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
V. Summary
OSHA’s review of the scientific and
medical literature indicates that
occupational heat exposure can and
does cause death. The physiological
mechanisms by which heat exposure
can result in death are clearly
established in the literature, and heat
exposure being a cause of death is
widely recognized in the medical and
scientific communities. Indeed,
occupational surveillance data
demonstrates that numerous workrelated deaths from occupational heat
exposure occur every year.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
cause of death or significant condition
contributing to death and note it on the
deceased individual’s death certificate.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Heat stroke happens when the body is
under severe heat stress and is unable
to dissipate excessive heat to keep the
body temperature at 37 °C (98.6 °F),
resulting in an elevated core body
temperature (Epstein and Yanovich,
2019). The hallmark characteristics of
heat stroke are: (1) central nervous
system (CNS) dysfunction, including
encephalopathy (i.e., brain dysfunction
manifesting as irrational behavior,
confusion, coma, or convulsions); and
(2) damage to multiple organs, including
the kidneys, liver, heart, pancreas,
gastrointestinal tract, as well as the
circulatory system. There are three
accepted mechanisms through which
heat exposure can cause CNS
dysfunction and/or multi-organ damage
(Bouchama et al., 2022; Garcia et al.,
2022; Iba et al., 2022). All three
mechanisms share a common origin:
heat exposure contributes to excessive
heat stress, which results in
hyperthermia.
One mechanism of heat stroke is
reduced cerebral blood velocity (CBV)
(an indicator of blood flow to the brain)
that results in orthostatic intolerance
(i.e., the inability to remain upright
without symptoms) (Wilson et al.,
2006). As individuals experience whole
body heating, CBV is reduced and
cerebral vascular resistance (the ratio of
carbon dioxide stimulus to cerebral
blood flow) increases. These changes
ultimately contribute to reduced
cerebral perfusion (flow of blood from
the circulatory system to cerebral tissue)
and blood flow, as well as orthostatic
intolerance (Wilson et al., 2006).
Another mechanism is damage to the
vascular endothelium. Hyperthermia
can damage or kill cells in the lining of
blood vessels, known as the vascular
endothelium. The body responds to
vascular endothelium damage through a
process called disseminated
intravascular coagulation (DIC). DIC is
characterized by two processes: (1) tiny
clots form in the tissues of multiple
organs, and (2) bleeding occurs at the
sites of those tiny clots. DIC is extremely
damaging and results in injury to organs
(Bouchama and Knochel, 2002).
Namely, DIC limits the delivery of
oxygen and nutrients to several organs
including the brain, heart, kidneys, and
liver. Thus, DIC can result in both CNS
dysfunction and multi-organ damage.
Additionally, damage to the vascular
endothelium makes it more permeable
and creates an imbalance in the
substances that control blood clotting,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
which promotes abnormal and
increased blood clotting (Bouchama and
Knochel, 2002; Wang et al., 2022).
A third mechanism is damage to the
cells in the lining of the gut, known as
the gut epithelium. Hyperthermia can
alter the cell membranes’ permeability
(Roti Roti et al., 2008), or directly cause
cells to die (Bynum et al., 1978). In
either case, cells in the gut epithelium
will leak endotoxins into the blood, a
process known as endotoxemia. When
these endotoxins circulate throughout
the body, the immune system
aggressively responds by activating cells
to fight infection and inflammation,
known as systemic inflammatory
response syndrome (SIRS) (Leon and
Helwig, 2010). The presence of
endotoxins, as well as the body’s
aggressive immune response, can cause
serious multi-organ damage (Epstein
and Yanovich, 2019; Wang et al., 2022).
In particular, the liver is usually one of
the first organs to be damaged and is
often what causes a heat stroke death
(Wang et al., 2022).
III. Occupational Heat Stroke
Heat stroke is life-threatening and can
severely impair workers’ safety and
health (Lucas et al., 2014). A study of
work-related HRIs in Florida using
hospital data reported that, during the
warm seasons from May through
October between 2005 through 2012,
heat stroke was the primary diagnosis in
91% (21 of 23) of deaths. In total, they
reported 160 cases of work-related heat
stroke (Harduar Morano and Watkins,
2017). Analyses of heat stroke among
military members indicate that roughly
73% of EHS patients require
hospitalization for at least two days
(Carter et al., 2007).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Heat stroke is a serious medical
emergency that requires immediate rest,
cooling, and usually hospitalization.
Prognosis for heat stroke is highly
dependent on how quickly heat stroke
is recognized and how quickly an
affected worker can be cooled. When an
affected person can be diagnosed early
and cooled rapidly, the prognosis is
generally good. For example, rapid
cooling within one hour of presentation
of symptoms of CHS was found to
reduce the mortality rate from 33% to
15% (Vicario et al., 1986). For EHS,
cooling the body below 104 °F within 30
minutes of collapse is associated with
very good outcomes (Casa et al., 2012;
Casa et al., 2015). The authors also
reported that they were unaware of any
cases of fatalities among EHS victims
where it was recorded that the body was
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
cooled below 104 °F within 30 minutes
of collapse (Casa et al., 2012).
Comparably, others have found that
the risk of morbidity and mortality from
heat stroke increases as treatment is
delayed (Demartini et al., 2015;
Schlader et al., 2022). Schlader et al.
(2022) found that a delay in cooling can
result in tissue damage, multi-organ
dysfunction, and eventually death.
Similarly, Zeller et al. (2011) found in
their retrospective cohort study that
patients who did not receive early or
immediate cooling had worse outcomes,
such as more severe forms of disease or
death, although their study design does
not allow for conclusions regarding
causality (Zeller et al., 2011). Khogali
and Weiner’s (1980) case study report
on 18 cases of heat stroke found that
72% of the patients took between 30–90
minutes to cool, whereas the other 28%
were resistant to cooling, taking two to
five hours to reach 38 °C (100.4 °F). This
means that there is variation in how
individuals respond to heat stroke
treatment and that some individuals
will respond quicker to treatment than
others. Prompt treatment is likely even
more critical for the individuals who
take longer to cool.
Data from the general population also
demonstrate the serious nature of heat
stroke. One analysis of nationwide data
estimated that nearly 55% of emergency
department visits for heat stroke
required hospitalization and roughly
3.5% of patients died in the emergency
department or at the hospital (Wu et al.,
2014). This study also found that heat
stroke medical emergencies are more
severe than other non-heat-related
emergencies, with a 2.6-fold increase in
admission rate and a 4.8-fold increase in
case fatality compared to those other
conditions (Wu et al., 2014).
Complete recovery for individuals
who are affected by heat stroke may
require time away from work. Some
research suggests the length of recovery
time and the need for time away from
work is based on how long a person was
at or above the critical core body
temperature of 41 °C (105.8 °F), and how
long it takes for biomarkers in blood to
normalize (McDermott et al., 2007).
Relevant biomarkers include those for
acute liver dysfunction, myolysis (the
breakdown of muscle tissue), and other
organ system biomarkers (Ward et al.,
2020; Schlader et al., 2022).
Guidelines for military personnel and
athletes suggest that it may be weeks or
months before a worker who has
suffered heat stroke can safely return to
work or perform the same level of work
they did before suffering heat stroke.
U.S. military members have clear
return-to-work protocols post-heat
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70713
stroke where members are assigned
grades of functional capacity in six
areas: physical capacity or stamina,
upper extremities, lower extremities,
hearing and ears, eyes, and psychiatric
functioning (O’Connor et al., 2007). For
example, when a soldier/airman
experiences heat stroke, they
automatically receive a reduced
function capacity grade status in
physical capacity. This also results in an
automatic referral to a medical
examination board. Soldiers and airmen
are not cleared to return to duty until
their laboratory results normalize, and
even then, their status remains a trial of
duty. If the individual has not exhibited
any heat intolerance after three months,
they are returned to a normal work
schedule. However, maximal exertion
and significant heat exposure remains
prohibited for these individuals. If a
military member experiences any heat
intolerance during the period of
restriction, or subsequent resumption to
normal duty, a referral to the physical
examination board for a hearing
regarding their health status is required
(O’Connor et al., 2007).
The U.S. Navy has its own set of
guidelines, which does not distinguish
between heat exhaustion and heat
stroke, but uses laboratory tests,
especially liver function tests, to
determine when sailors are allowed to
return to duty. For those who have
suffered heat stroke, full return to duty
is usually not granted until somewhere
between two days to three weeks later
(O’Connor et al., 2007).
In 2023, the American College of
Sports Medicine (ACSM) published
their consensus statement which
provides evidence-based strategies to
reduce and eliminate HRIs, including a
return to activity protocol for athletes
recovering from EHS (Roberts et al.,
2023). Of note, ACSM names athletes
(whether elite, recreational, or tactical)
and occupational laborers as groups
who are active and regularly perform
exertional activities that could lead to
EHS. Specifically, ACSM
recommendations include refraining
from exercise for at least seven days
following release from the initial
medical care for EHS treatment. Once
all laboratory results and vital signs
have normalized, ACSM recommends
an individual can exercise in cool
environments and gradually increase
duration, intensity, and heat exposure
over a two to four-week period to
initiate environmental acclimatization
(Roberts et al., 2023). If the affected
athlete does not return to pre-EHS
activity levels within four to six weeks,
further medical evaluation is needed.
ACSM recommends a full return to
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70714
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
activity between two to four weeks after
the individual has demonstrated
exercise acclimatization and heat
tolerance with no abnormal symptoms
or test results during the reacclimatization period (Roberts et al.,
2023). Similarly, the National Athletic
Trainer’s Association proposes that
individuals who experience EHS should
complete a 7 to 21-day rest period, be
asymptomatic, have normal blood-work
values, and obtain a physician’s
clearance prior to beginning a gradual
return to activity (Casa et al., 2015).
In the military setting it is accepted
that returning to work too early and/or
without adequate work restrictions can
result in incomplete recovery from heat
stroke, which may necessitate a
prolonged restricted work status
(McDermott et al., 2007). About 10–20%
of people who have had heat stroke
have been shown to experience heat
intolerance roughly two months after
having the heat stroke (Binkley et al.,
2002). In some instances, this has lasted
for five years and has increased the risk
for another heat stroke (Binkley et al.,
2002; McDermott et al., 2007). Similarly,
a case study report of EHS cases
amongst the U.S. Army found that in
one of the ten cases examined, the
person was heat intolerant for 11.5
months post-EHS (Armstrong et al.,
1989).
Only a limited number of studies have
focused on the long-term effects of heat
stroke. This includes research by
Wallace et al. (2007), whose
retrospective review of military service
members found that those who suffered
an EHS event earlier in life were more
likely to die due to cardiovascular
disease and ischemic heart disease.
Similarly, Wang et al. (2019) report that
prior exertional heat illness was
associated with a higher prevalence of
acute ischemic stroke, acute myocardial
infarction, and an almost three-fold
higher prevalence of chronic kidney
disease. Other research in mice support
these claims and indicate that
epigenetic effects post-EHS result in
immunosuppression and an altered heat
shock protein response as well as
development of metabolic disorders that
could negatively impact long-term
cardiovascular health (Murray et al.,
2020; Laitano et al., 2020).
V. Summary
OSHA’s review of the scientific and
medical literature indicates that
occupational heat exposure can cause
heat stroke, a medical emergency. The
physiological mechanisms by which
heat exposure can result in heat stroke
are well-established in the literature,
and heat exposure as a cause of heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
stroke is well-recognized in the medical
and scientific communities. The best
available research demonstrates that
heat stroke must be treated as soon as
possible and that prolonged time
between experiencing heat stroke and
seeking treatment increases the
likelihood of death and may result in
long-term health effects.
F. Heat Exhaustion
I. Introduction
NIOSH defines heat exhaustion as ‘‘[a]
heat-related illness characterized by
elevation of core body temperature
above 38 °C (100.4 °F) and abnormal
performance of one or more organ
systems, without injury to the central
nervous system’’ (NIOSH, 2016). Heat
exhaustion can progress to heat stroke if
not treated properly and promptly, and
may require time away from work for a
full recovery.
Signs and symptoms of heat
exhaustion typically include profuse
sweating, changes in mental status,
dizziness, nausea, headache, irritability,
weakness, decreased urine output and
elevated core body temperature up to
40 °C (104 °F) (NIOSH, 2016; Kenny et
al., 2018). Collapse may or may not
occur. Significant injury to the central
nervous system, and significant
inflammatory response do not occur
during heat exhaustion. However, there
appears to be a fine line between heat
exhaustion and heat stroke. Kenny et al.
2018 state that it can be difficult to
clinically differentiate between heat
exhaustion and early heat stroke.
NIOSH also states that heat exhaustion
‘‘may signal impending heat stroke’’
(NIOSH, 2016). Armstrong et al. (2007)
recommend that rectal temperature be
taken to distinguish between heat
exhaustion and heat stroke.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Heat exhaustion occurs when heat
stress results in elevated body
temperature between 98.6 °F and 104 °F
(37 °C and 40 °C) and physiological
changes occur (Kenny et al., 2018).
Under these significant heat stress
conditions, heavy sweating occurs,
tissue perfusion is reduced, and
inflammatory mediators are released.
Electrolyte imbalances can occur due to
fluid and electrolyte losses through
sweating paired with inadequate
replenishment. Voluntary and
involuntary dehydration can exacerbate
this process (Hendrie et al., 1997; Brake
and Bates, 2003). ‘‘Voluntary
dehydration,’’ as used by Brake and
Bates, refers to the circumstance where
a dehydrated worker does not
adequately rehydrate, despite the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
availability of water. Upon review of
several studies, Kenny et al. (2018)
report that dehydration among workers
is common, even when water is readily
available. There is also evidence that
even when water intake increases, as
sweat rate and dehydration increase,
intake may not be adequate to fully
replace losses (Hendrie et al., 1997).
Brake and Bates (2003) summarized
various hypothesized reasons for
voluntary and involuntary dehydration.
One hypothesized reason for voluntary
dehydration is a delayed or decreased
thirst response (Brake and Bates, 2003).
Other reasons include mechanisms that
affect fluid retention, such as the
dependence of fluid retention on solutes
such as sodium, which may be in
imbalance under heat stress (Brake and
Bates, 2003). Lack of adequate hydration
could also be due to workplace
pressures or concerns about sanitation
(Rao, 2007; Iglesias-Rios, 2023).
The combination of heat stress,
upright posture, and low vascular fluid
volume (hypovolemia) can further
dysregulate the circulatory system and
affect clotting mechanisms (Kenny et al.,
2018). Heat stress reduces blood flow to
the abdominal organs, kidneys, muscles,
and brain and increases blood flow to
the skin to aid in cooling. These changes
in the circulatory system and blood flow
to the brain can potentially lead to
dizziness or faintness upon standing
(orthostatic intolerance), or collapse.
Other factors that affect the
development of heat exhaustion include
individual health status, preparedness
(such as acclimatization level),
individual characteristics, knowledge,
access to fluids, environmental factors,
personal protective equipment use and
work pacing and intensity (Kenny,
2018).
III. Occupational Heat Exhaustion
Heat exhaustion is one of the more
common heat-related illnesses
(Armstrong et al., 2007; Harduar Morano
and Watkins, 2017; Lewandowski and
Shaman, 2022). In their study of heatillness hospitalizations in Florida
during May to October from 2005–2012,
Harduar Morano and Watkins (2017)
reported that there were 2,659 cases of
work-related heat exhaustion that
resulted in emergency department visits
or hospitalization, versus 181 cases of
work-related heat stroke that resulted in
emergency department visits,
hospitalization, or death. Similar results
have been reported in studies of heatrelated illness among the United States
Armed Forces and miners showing the
frequency of heat exhaustion
(Dickinson, 1994; Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2022b;
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Lewandowski and Shaman, 2022;
Donoghue et al., 2000; Donoghue, 2004).
While in some studies heat exhaustion
is not specifically diagnosed, several
qualitative studies describe self-reported
symptoms in workers that may be
indicative of heat exhaustion (e.g.,
Mirabelli et al., 2010; Fleischer et al.,
2013; Kearney et al., 2016; Mutic et al.,
2018). These symptoms included
headache, nausea, vomiting, feeling
faint, and heavy sweating.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Heat exhaustion may require
treatment beyond basic first aid to
prevent progression to heat stroke
(Kenny et al., 2018). In cases where the
degree of severity of heat illness is
unclear, the individual should be
treated as if they have heat stroke
(Armstrong, 1989). For a worker
experiencing heat exhaustion, NIOSH
recommends the following steps to
ensure the worker receives proper and
adequate treatment: ‘‘Take worker to a
clinic or emergency room for medical
evaluation and treatment; If medical
care is unavailable, call 911; Someone
should stay with worker until help
arrives; Remove worker from hot area
and give liquids to drink; Remove
unnecessary clothing, including shoes
and socks; Cool the worker with cold
compresses or have the worker wash
head, face, and neck with cold water;
Encourage frequent sips of cool water’’
(NIOSH, 2016).
Complete recovery from heat
exhaustion may require a restricted
work status (or limited work duties).
Donoghue et al. (2000) reported that
following heat exhaustion, 29% (22 of
77) of miners included in the study
required a restricted work status for at
least one shift. The military has specific
protocols for return to duty following
heat exhaustion. For example, the U.S.
Army and Air Force follow the protocol
outlines in AR 40–501 (O’Connor et al.,
2007). Three instances of heat
exhaustion in less than 24 months can
result in referral to a Medical Evaluation
Board before a full return to service.
Some military units have additional or
more specific guidelines. For example,
one military unit, at Womack Army
Medical Center in North Carolina, has
guidelines that allow individuals who
are considered to have mild illness,
fully recovered in the emergency room,
and have no abnormal laboratory
findings to return to light duty the
following day and limited duty the day
after that. However, they also indicate
that some effects of heat illness may be
subtle or delayed and recommend
individuals avoid strenuous exercise for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
several days and remain under
observation (O’Connor et al., 2007).
V. Summary
The scientific and medical literature
presented here clearly demonstrate that
heat exhaustion is a recognized health
effect of occupational heat exposure.
The best available evidence on the
symptoms, treatment, and recovery of
heat exhaustion demonstrates that heat
exhaustion can progress to heat stroke,
a medical emergency, if not treated
promptly and that heat exhaustion may
require time away from work for a full
recovery.
G. Heat Syncope
I. Introduction
Occupational heat exposure can result
in heat syncope. Syncope is the medical
term for ‘‘fainting,’’ and heat syncope is
defined as ‘‘fainting, dizziness, or lightheadedness after standing or suddenly
rising from a sitting/lying position’’ due
to heat exposure (NIOSH, 2023a). Heat
syncope may sometimes be referred to
as ‘‘exercise-associated collapse’’ (EAC),
but heat syncope can happen without
significant levels of exertion (Asplund
et al., 2011; Pearson et al., 2014). As
explained below, heat syncope is an
acknowledged and documented health
effect of occupational heat exposure.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
There are two mechanisms for how
heat exposure can cause heat syncope
(Schlader et al., 2016; Jimenez et al.,
1999). One mechanism for heat syncope
is reduced blood flow to the brain.
Elevated core temperature induces
vasodilation, sweating, and may result
in blood pooling in certain areas of the
body (see Section IV.B., General
Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health
Effects). Thus, there is a lower
circulating blood volume, which can
reduce blood flow to the brain and
cause loss of consciousness (Wilson et
al., 2006; Van Lieshout et al., 2003).
A second mechanism for heat syncope
is reduced cerebral blood velocity (CBV)
(indicative of reduced blood flow to the
brain) that results in orthostatic
intolerance (the inability to remain
upright without symptoms) during a
heat stress episode (Wilson et al., 2006).
As individuals experience whole body
heating, CBV is reduced and cerebral
vascular resistance (the ratio of carbon
dioxide stimulus to cerebral blood flow)
increases. These changes ultimately
contribute to reduced cerebral perfusion
and blood flow, as well as orthostatic
intolerance (Wilson et al., 2006). The
orthostatic response to heat stress
during ‘‘rest’’ (i.e., standing/sitting) is
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70715
essentially equivalent to the orthostatic
response to heat stress after exercise if
skin temperature is similarly elevated
(Pearson et al., 2014). While core
temperature is not always elevated in
cases of heat syncope, skin temperature
typically is (Department of the Army,
2022; Noakes et al., 2008).
Differentiating between heat syncope,
heat exhaustion, and heat stroke is a
critical step in proper diagnosis
(Santelli et al., 2014; Coris et al., 2004).
As stated above, heat syncope always
involves loss of consciousness, but it
does not require elevated core body
temperature (Santelli et al., 2014;
Holtzhausen et al., 1994). Conversely,
heat exhaustion and stroke do not
require loss of consciousness. Though
central nervous system (CNS)
disturbances are possible in heat stroke
and heat stroke is always characterized
by significantly elevated core
temperature. Further, recovery of mental
status is faster in heat syncope than in
exhaustion and heat stroke, since
cooling may not be required for
treatment of heat syncope (Howe and
Boden, 2007).
III. Occupational Heat Syncope
Workers have experienced heat
syncope when exposed to heat. A
survey-based study in southern Georgia
found that 4% of 405 farmworkers
experienced fainting within the
previous week (Fleischer et al., 2013).
Another survey-based study in North
Carolina asked 281 farmworkers if they
had ever experienced heat-related
illness and found that 3% of workers
had fainted (Mirabelli et al., 2010).
While these cases were not formally
diagnosed as heat syncope, Fleischer
reported temperatures ranging from 34–
40 °C (94–104 °F) and a heat index of
37–42 °C (100–108 °F) at the time
workers fainted, and Mirabelli described
the working conditions at the time of
fainting as being in ‘‘extreme heat.’’
IV. Treatment and Recovery
NIOSH recommends treating heat
syncope by having the worker sit down
in a cool environment and hydrate with
either water, juice, or a sports drink
(NIOSH, 2016). The Department of the
Army recommends that ‘‘victims of
heat/parade syncope will recover
rapidly once they sit or lay supine,
though complete recovery of stable
blood pressure and heart rate (resolution
of orthostasis or ability to stand without
fainting) in some individuals may take
1 to 2 hours’’ (Department of the Army,
2022). Treatment recommendations for
athletes consist of moving the athlete to
a cool area and laying them supine with
elevated legs to assist in venous return,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70716
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
possibly with oral or intravenous
rehydration (Peterkin et al., 2016; Howe
and Boden, 2007; Seto et al., 2005;
Lugo-Amador et al., 2004).
An episode of heat syncope may
require time away from work for a
thorough evaluation to ascertain one’s
risk for recurrent/future episodes of heat
syncope. No studies have evaluated
recurring episodes of syncope among
workers specifically, but a study found
that, for the general population, 1-year
syncope recurrence (any type) was 14%
in working-age people (18–65 years)
(Barbic et al., 2019). The U.S. Army has
a requirement to ‘‘obtain a complete
history to rule out other causes of
syncope, including an exertional heat
illness or other medical diagnosis (for
example, cardiac disorder)’’
(Department of the Army, 2022).
Recommendations for athletes include
thorough evaluation ‘‘for injury
resulting from a fall, and all cardiac,
neurologic, or other potentially serious
causes for syncope’’ (Howe and Boden,
2007; Lugo-Amador et al., 2004; Binkley
et al., 2002). Indeed, if an injury (e.g.,
fall, collision) is sustained because of
heat syncope, treatment beyond first aid
(including hospitalization) may be
necessary. Supporting this point, more
general syncope has been linked to
occupational accidents requiring
hospitalizations (Nume et al., 2017).
V. Summary
The scientific and medical literature
presented in this section demonstrate
that heat syncope is a recognized health
effect of occupational heat exposure.
Studies suggest that heat syncope may
require time away from work for further
evaluation. Additionally, heat syncope
can lead to injuries (e.g., injury from a
fall), some of which may require
hospitalization.
H. Rhabdomyolysis
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Introduction
Rhabdomyolysis is a life-threatening
illness that can affect workers exposed
to occupational heat. NIOSH defines
rhabdomyolysis as ‘‘a medical condition
associated with heat stress and
prolonged physical exertion, resulting
in the rapid breakdown of muscle and
the rupture and necrosis of the affected
muscles’’ (NIOSH, 2016). This
definition is specific to exertional
rhabdomyolysis. Another form of
rhabdomyolysis, called traumatic
rhabdomyolysis, is caused by direct
muscle trauma (e.g., from a fall or crush
injury). Workers can experience such
injuries, and consequently suffer from
traumatic rhabdomyolysis, because of
occupational heat exposure (see Section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
IV.P., Heat-Related Injuries). However,
this section will focus only on
exertional rhabdomyolysis. Unless
otherwise specified, all references to
rhabdomyolysis are shorthand for
exertional rhabdomyolysis.
Signs and symptoms of
rhabdomyolysis include myalgia
(muscle pain), muscle weakness, muscle
tenderness, muscle swelling, and/or
dark-colored urine (Armed Forces
Health Surveillance Division, 2023b;
Dantas et al., 2022; O’Connor et al.,
2008; Cervellin et al., 2010). Notably,
the onset of these symptoms may be
delayed by 24–72 hours (Kim et al.,
2016). Rhabdomyolysis commonly
affects individuals who are exposed to
heat during physical exertion. For
example, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) investigated an
incident in which an entire cohort of 50
police trainees were diagnosed with
rhabdomyolysis after the first 3 days of
a 14-week training program; the trainees
had engaged in heavy physical exertion
outdoors with limited access to water.
The CDC concluded that adequate
hydration is particularly important
when the HI approaches 80 °F
(Goodman et al., 1990).
Rhabdomyolysis has long been
recognized as a heat-related illness by
NIOSH, the U.S. Armed Forces, and
national athletic organizations such as
the American College of Sports
Medicine (Armstrong et al., 2007).
Specifically, NIOSH lists
rhabdomyolysis as an ‘‘acute heat
disorder’’ in its Criteria for a
Recommended Standard (2016) and
provides detailed recommendations for
recognition and treatment of
rhabdomyolysis. NIOSH also conducted
case studies and retrospective analyses
to identify cases of rhabdomyolysis
among workers exposed to heat,
including firefighter cadets and
instructors, as well as park rangers
(Eisenberg et al., 2019; Eisenberg J et al.,
2015; Eisenberg and Methner, 2014).
Similarly, the U.S. Armed Forces
developed a case definition that
specifies rhabdomyolysis can be heatrelated (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Board, 2017), and this
definition is applied in their annual
surveillance reports of HRIs. From 2018
to 2022, most rhabdomyolysis cases
(75.9%) occurred during warmer
months (i.e., May to October) (Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2023b). In a retrospective study of
hospital admissions for rhabdomyolysis
in military members (2010–2013),
60.1% (193 out of 321) cases were
deemed to be associated with exertion
and exposure to heat (Oh et al., 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Many studies have also found that
rhabdomyolysis often coincides with
exertional heat stroke and other HRIs
such as heat exhaustion, heat cramps,
hyponatremia, and dehydration. The
frequent co-occurrence of
rhabdomyolysis and other HRIs has
been reported among workers, including
police and firefighters (Eisenberg et al.,
2019; Goodman et al., 1990), workers
included in OSHA enforcement
investigations (Tustin et al., 2018a),
military members (Oh et al., 2022;
Carter et al., 2005), athletes (Thompson
et al., 2018), and in the general
population (Thongprayoon et al., 2020).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Studies have identified two
interrelated mechanisms through which
heat exposure, combined with exertion,
can cause rhabdomyolysis. Both
mechanisms share a common origin:
occupational heat exposure and exertion
both contribute to excessive heat stress,
which in turn causes an elevated core
temperature. Both mechanisms also
share a common outcome: the
breakdown and death of muscle tissue,
which is the hallmark characteristic of
rhabdomyolysis. The first mechanism is
thermal injury to muscle cells. When
the body’s core temperature is elevated,
it creates a toxic environment that can
directly injure or kill muscle cells. The
temperature at which this occurs,
known as the thermal maximum, is
estimated to be about 107.6 °F (42 °C)
(Bynum et al., 1978). At the thermal
maximum, the structural components of
the cells’ membranes are liquified and
the membrane breaks down. Proteins in
the cells’ mitochondria, which are key
to energy production, change shape and
no longer function properly. Calcium,
which is normally maintained at a low
level inside muscle cells, will rush into
the cells and activate inflammatory
processes that accelerate the death of
those cells (Torres et al., 2015; Khan,
2009).
The second mechanism is lack of
oxygen to muscle cells. When the body
attempts to cool itself, it can lose high
volumes of sweat. Sweat loss can
deplete the body’s stores of water and
electrolytes, leading to low blood
volume (see Section IV.B., General
Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health
Effects). Low blood volume, and low
potassium in the blood (known as
hypokalemia), can both contribute to
muscle cell death. An adequate supply
of blood is necessary to deliver oxygen
to muscles, and an adequate supply of
potassium is needed to support
vasodilation (to support increased blood
flow to the muscles during exertion).
When neither blood volume nor
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
potassium are sufficient, the muscle
cells do not receive enough oxygen
(known as ischemia). When this occurs,
the muscle cells produce less energy
and eventually will die if exertion
continues (Knochel and Schlein, 1972).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Occupational Rhabdomyolysis
While OSHA is not aware of
surveillance data on the incidence of
rhabdomyolysis in the worker
population in the United States, there
are surveillance data on the incidence of
rhabdomyolysis among active military
members in the Army, Navy, Air Force,
and Marine Corps. These data have been
reported for the U.S. Army from 2004 to
2006 (Hill et al., 2012) and for all
military branches from 2008 through
2022 (Armed Forces Health Surveillance
Division, 2023b; Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2018; U.S. Armed
Forces, 2013). These surveillance data
and the studies described above by
NIOSH and others indicate that workers
performing strenuous tasks in the heat
are at risk of developing
rhabdomyolysis. The U.S. Armed Forces
has successfully identified many cases
of heat-related rhabdomyolysis by
searching medical records for the
presence of either the ICD–10 code for
rhabdomyolysis and/or the ICD–10 code
for myoglobinuria, along with any other
heat-related codes (table IV–1) (Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2023b; Oh et al., 2022).
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Rhabdomyolysis is a serious heatrelated illness that can cause lifethreatening complications. Many cases
of rhabdomyolysis may require
hospitalization. For example, A CDC
investigation into a police training
program in Massachusetts found that
26% of police trainees (13 out of 50)
were hospitalized for rhabdomyolysis
only three days into their training
(Goodman et al., 1990). The mean length
of hospitalization was 6 days, with a
range of 1 to 20 days (Goodman et al.,
1990). Similarly, a military surveillance
study identified 473 rhabdomyolysis
cases among military members in 2022,
with 35.3% of cases (167 out of 473)
requiring hospitalization (Armed Forces
Health Surveillance Division, 2023b). In
a retrospective study of 193 military
trainees hospitalized for
rhabdomyolysis, the mean length of
hospitalization was 2.6 days, with a
range of 0 to 25 days (Oh et al., 2022).
The focus of treatment for
rhabdomyolysis during hospitalization
is to reduce levels of creatine kinase
(CK) and myoglobin in the blood, as
well as correct electrolyte imbalances,
through aggressive administration of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
intravenous fluids (generally normal
saline) (O’Connor et al., 2020; Luetmer
et al., 2020; Manspeaker et al., 2016;
Torres et al., 2015). Monitoring is used
to repeatedly measure CK levels until a
peak concentration is reached (often
within 1–3 days), and then to ensure
that CK levels are consistently trending
downwards before discharge from the
hospital (Kodadek et al., 2022; Oh et al.,
2022).
Complications of rhabdomyolysis are
also possible. When muscle cells die,
they release several electrolytes and
proteins into the bloodstream that can
cause severe health complications. For
example, the release of potassium from
muscle cells can cause hyperkalemia
(high level of potassium in the blood),
which then leads to heart arrhythmias
(abnormal heart rhythms) (Mora et al.,
2017; Sauret et al., 2002). Also, the
release of myoglobin into the
bloodstream can be toxic for the
kidneys. When blood is filtered by
nephrons (functional units of the
kidneys) to produce urine, the presence
of even small amounts of myoglobin can
obstruct and damage the nephrons
(Mora et al., 2017; Sauret et al., 2002).
In some cases, these complications from
rhabdomyolysis can be life-threatening
(Wesdock and Donoghue, 2019) and in
fact fatalities have been reported
(Gardner and Kark, 1994; Goodman et
al., 1990). A more detailed discussion of
how rhabdomyolysis can cause acute
kidney injury or other kidney damage
can be found in Section IV.M., Kidney
Health Effects.
Guidelines for return to work among
workers diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis
are limited. In the U.S. military, soldiers
deemed to be at low risk for recurrence
of rhabdomyolysis are restricted to light,
indoor duty and encouraged to
rehydrate for at least 72 hours to allow
for normalization of CK levels. If CK
levels do not normalize, they must
continue indoor, light duty; if CK levels
do normalize, they can proceed to light,
outdoor duty for at least 1 week and
must show no return of clinical
symptoms before they can gradually
return to full duty. In contrast, soldiers
deemed to be at high risk for recurrence
of rhabdomyolysis must undergo
additional diagnostic tests, with
consultation from experts, and can be
given an individualized, restricted
exercise program while they await
clearance for full return to duty
(O’Connor et al., 2020; O’Connor et al.,
2008). These guidelines have been
adopted by the Armed Forces and
restated in their surveillance reports of
rhabdomyolysis (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2023b).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70717
V. Summary
The available scientific literature
indicates that rhabdomyolysis can result
from physical exertion in the heat.
Based on plausible mechanistic data,
studies by NIOSH and others, and
surveillance data indicating incidence
of rhabdomyolysis among active
military members, OSHA preliminarily
determines that workers performing
strenuous tasks in the heat are at risk of
rhabdomyolysis.
I. Hyponatremia
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may
experience hyponatremia, a condition
that occurs when the level of sodium in
the blood falls below normal levels
(<135 milliequivalents per liter (mEq/L))
(NIOSH, 2016). Hyponatremia is often
caused by drinking too much water or
hypotonic fluids, such as sports drinks,
over a prolonged period of time.
Without sodium replacement, the high
water intake can result in losses of
sodium in the blood as more sodium is
lost due to increased sweating from heat
exposure and urination (Korey Stringer
Institute (KSI), n.d.). Mild forms of
hyponatremia may not produce any
signs or symptoms, or may present with
symptoms including muscle weakness
and/or twitching, dizziness,
lightheadedness, headache, nausea and/
or vomiting, weight gain, and swelling
of the hands or feet (KSI, n.d.; NIOSH,
2016). In severe cases, hyponatremia
may cause altered mental status,
seizures, cerebral edema, pulmonary
edema, and coma, which may be fatal
(KSI, n.d.; NIOSH, 2016; Rosner and
Kirven, 2007). NIOSH and the U.S.
Army classify hyponatremia as a heatrelated illness (NIOSH, 2016;
Department of the Army, 2022).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
When exposed to heat, the autonomic
nervous system triggers the body’s sweat
response, in which sweat glands release
water to wet the skin (Roddie et al.,
1957; Grant and Holling, 1938). The
purpose of the sweat response is to cool
the body. However, in doing so, it can
deplete the body’s stores of water and
electrolytes (e.g., sodium, potassium,
chloride, calcium, and magnesium) that
are essential for normal bodily function
(Shirreffs and Maughan, 1997). As the
body’s store of sodium is lessening and
high quantities of water are consumed,
hyponatremia may develop as sodium
in the blood becomes diluted (<135
mEq/L). In some cases, this dilution
may cause an osmotic disequilibrium—
an imbalance in the amount of sodium
inside and outside the cell resulting in
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70718
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
cellular swelling—which can lead to the
serious and fatal health outcomes
discussed above.
III. Occupational Hyponatremia
Surveillance of hyponatremia among
workers is limited. However, a recent
case study demonstrates the potential
severity and life-threatening nature of
hyponatremia. After a seven-day
planned absence from work, a 34-yearold male process control operator in an
aluminum smelter pot room was
hospitalized due to a variety of HRI
symptoms including hyponatremia,
with serum (the liquid portion of blood
collected without clotting factors)
sodium level of 114 millimoles per liter
(mmol/L) (reference range: 136–145
mmol/L) (Wesdock and Donoghue,
2019). After 13 days in the hospital, the
patient was discharged with a diagnosis
of ‘‘severe hyponatremia likely triggered
by heat exposure’’ (Wesdock and
Donoghue, 2019). The patient was still
out of work 32 weeks after the incident.
While no temperature data for the pot
room were available, an exposure
assessment used outdoor temperatures
that day and pot room temperatures
from the literature to estimate that the
WBGT could have been as high as 33 °C,
which the authors state exceeds the
ACGIH TLV for light work for
acclimatized workers (Wesdock and
Donoghue, 2019).
The relationship of heat exposure and
hyponatremia was examined among
male dockyard workers in Dubai, United
Arab Emirates (Holmes et al., 2011).
This population performed long periods
of manual work in the heat and
consumed a diet low in sodium. A first
round of plasma (i.e., the liquid part of
blood collected that contains water,
nutrients and clotting factors) samples
were taken at the end of the summer
(n=44), with a second round taken at the
end of the winter among volunteers still
willing to participate (n=38). In the
summer, 55% of participants were
found to be hyponatremic (<135
millimolar (mM)), whereas only 8%
were hyponatremic in the winter.
Although ambient temperature
conditions were not reported, the
authors indicate that hyponatremia was
highest during the summer because of
sodium losses through sweat and
inadequate sodium replacement
(Holmes et al., 2011).
Hyponatremia among the military
population has been well documented
by the Annual Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, which releases
annual reports on exertional
hyponatremia among active duty
component services members, each with
surveillance data for the previous 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
years (e.g., Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2023a; Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2022a; Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2021; Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2020). Cases come from the Defense
Medical Surveillance System and
include both ambulatory medical visits
and hospitalizations in both military
and civilian facilities. During the period
of 2004 through 2022, the number of
cases of hyponatremia among U.S.
Armed Forces peaked in 2010 with 180
cases. The lowest number during that
time period was 2013, when 72 cases
were reported. During the last 15 years
in which data were reported (2007–
2022), 1,690 cases of hyponatremia
occurred. Of these 1,690 cases, 86.8%
(1,467) were diagnosed and treated
during an ambulatory care visit (Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2023a). As the diagnostic code for
hyponatremia may include cases that
are not heat-related, these data may be
overestimates. However, such
overestimation is reduced in this study
as the authors controlled for many other
related diagnoses (e.g., kidney diseases,
endocrine disorders, alcohol/illicit drug
abuse), which can cause hyponatremia.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment and recovery for
hyponatremia can vary depending on
severity and symptoms. Workers
presenting with mild symptoms should
increase salt intake by consuming salty
foods or oral hypertonic saline and
restrict fluid until symptoms resolve or
sodium levels return to within normal
limits (KSI, n.d.). Medical attention may
be required in severe cases, which may
be life-threating, and may be sought to
address symptoms and personal risk
factors (e.g., history of heart conditions,
on a low sodium diet) (NIOSH, 2016).
V. Summary
The available evidence in the
scientific literature indicates that
hyponatremia can result from
occupational heat exposure. The
evidence on treatment and recovery
demonstrates that hyponatremia can
require medical attention and, in some
cases, may be life-threatening.
J. Heat Cramps
I. Introduction
Workers exposed to environmental or
radiant heat can experience sudden
muscle cramps known as ‘‘heat
cramps.’’ NIOSH defines heat cramps as
‘‘a heat-related illness characterized by
spastic contractions of the voluntary
muscles (mainly arms, hands, legs, and
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
feet), usually associated with restricted
salt intake and profuse sweating without
significant body dehydration’’ (NIOSH,
2016). Someone can experience heat
cramps even if they are frequently
hydrating with water, but they are not
replenishing electrolytes. Heat cramps
are recognized as a ‘‘heat-related
illness’’ by numerous organizations,
including NIOSH, U.S. Army, U.S.
Navy, National Athletic Trainers’
Association (NATA), American College
of Sports Medicine (ACSM), and World
Medicine (formerly known as IAAF).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
It is recognized in the medical and
scientific communities that heat cramps
result from heat exposure. However, the
exact physiological mechanism is not
known. In an early study of heat
cramps, investigators included the
following as the diagnostic criteria for
heat cramps: exposure to high
temperatures at work; painful muscle
cramps; rapid loss of salt in the sweat
that is not replaced (which may cause
hyponatremia); diminished
concentration of chloride in the blood
and in the body tissues (also known as
hypochloremia); and rapid amelioration
of symptoms after appropriate treatment
(Talbott and Michelsen, 1933).
The following mechanism has been
proposed for the development of heat
cramps: profuse sweating can deplete
electrolyte stores (e.g., sodium (Na),
potassium (K), calcium (Ca)), which
exacerbates muscle fatigue and can
cause heat cramps (Bergeron, 2003;
Horswill et al., 2009; Schallig et al.,
2017; Derrick, 1934). The U.S. Army
further posits that ‘‘intracellular calcium
is increased via a reduction in the
sodium concentration gradient across
the cell membrane. The increased
intracellular calcium accumulation then
stimulates actin-myosin interactions
(that is, filaments propelling muscle
filaments) causing the muscle
contractions’’ (Department of the Army,
2022). Heat cramps are sometimes
referred to, more broadly, as exerciseassociated muscle cramps (EAMCs)
(Bergeron et al., 2008). However, heat
cramps are distinct in that they only
occur in hot conditions, which
exacerbate electrolyte depletion, and
may or may not be associated with
exercise.
III. Occupational Heat Cramps
Surveillance data and survey study
data demonstrate that workers exposed
to environmental or radiant heat
frequently experience heat cramps in
the United States. In a study of heatrelated illness hospitalizations and
deaths for the U.S. Army from 1980–
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2002, 8% of heat-related illness
hospitalizations recorded were due to
heat cramps (Carter et al., 2005).
Similarly, in studies of self-reported
heat-related illness, workers frequently
cite heat cramps as a common symptom
of heat exposure. Specifically, in several
studies of self-reported heat-related
symptoms among farmworkers in
multiple States, participants reported
experiencing sudden muscle cramps in
the prior week in Georgia (33.7% of 405
respondents) (Fleischer et al., 2013),
North Carolina (35.7% of 158
respondents) (Kearney et al., 2016), and
Florida (30% of 198 respondents)
(Mutic et al., 2018). In another study of
self-reported symptoms among 60
migrant farmworkers in Georgia, heatrelated muscle cramps were reported by
25% of participants, the second most
frequently reported HRI symptom
(Smith et al., 2021). In a study
examining exertional heat illness and
corresponding wet bulb globe
temperatures in football players at five
southeastern U.S. colleges from August
to October 2003, the authors found that
the highest incidences of exertional heat
illness (EHI) occurred in August (88%,
EHI rate= 8.95/1000 athlete-exposures
(Aes)) and consisted of 70% heat
cramps (6.13/1000 Aes) (Cooper et al.,
2016).
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment for heat cramps includes
electrolyte-containing fluid replacement
(also known as isotonic fluid
replacement), stretching, and massage
(Gauer and Meyers, 2019; Peterkin et al.,
2016). In some cases, sodium
replacement may be a treatment for heat
cramps (Talbott and Michelsen, 1933;
Sandor, 1997; Jansen et al., 2002). In
severe cases, it is recommended that
magnesium levels of the patient are
obtained and if necessary, magnesium
replacement through IV therapy is
provided (O’Brien et al., 2012). The
ACSM recommends rest, prolonged
stretching in targeted muscle groups,
oral sodium chloride ingestion in fluids
or foods, or intravenous normal saline
fluids in severe cases (ACSM, 2007).
NIOSH recommends that medical
attention is needed if the worker has
heart problems, is on a low sodium diet,
or if cramps do not subside within 1
hour (NIOSH, 2016). If treated early and
effectively, individuals may return to
activity after heat cramps have subsided
(Bergeron, 2007; Savioli et al., 2022;
Gauer and Meyers, 2019). However,
severe heat cramps may require an
emergency department visit or
hospitalization (Harduar Morano and
Waller, 2017; Carter et al., 2005). While
most cases of heat cramps do not require
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
restricted work status or time away from
work, guidelines for military personnel
suggest some cases may require light
workload the next day and limited
workload the following day, with
observation of the affected patient
because some additional deficits may be
delayed or subtle (O’Connor et al.,
2007). In addition, guidelines for
military personnel advise that strenuous
exercise be avoided for several days in
some cases of heat cramps (O’Connor et
al., 2007). Severe heat cramps may also
elicit soreness for several days which
can lead to a longer recovery period
(Casa et al., 2015).
V. Summary
OSHA’s review of the scientific and
medical literature indicates that heat
cramps are a recognized health effect of
occupational heat exposure. Indeed,
several studies of self-reported
symptoms of HRI among farmworkers in
multiple States have indicated that heat
cramps are quite common. The best
available evidence on treatment and
recovery indicates that heat cramps can,
in some cases, require medical attention
and may require time away from work
or an adjusted workload.
K. Heat Rash
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may
experience heat rash. Heat rash is
defined by NIOSH as ‘‘a skin irritation
caused by excessive sweating during
hot, humid weather’’ (NIOSH, 2022).
NIOSH, the U.S. Army, and the U.S.
Navy classify heat rash as a heat-related
illness (NIOSH, 2016; Department of the
Army, 2022; Department of the Navy,
2023). Also known as miliaria rubra or
prickly heat, workers with heat rash
develop red clusters of pimples or small
blisters, which can produce itchy or
prickly sensations that become more
irritating as sweating persists in the
affected area. Heat rash can last for
several days and tends to form in areas
where clothing is restrictive and rubs
against the skin, most commonly on the
neck, upper chest, groin, under the
breasts, and in elbow creases (OSHA,
2011; NIOSH, 2022; OSHA, 2024a). If
left untreated, heat rash can become
infected, and more severe cases can lead
to high fevers and heat exhaustion
(Wenzel and Horn, 1998). In some cases,
heat rash can lead to hypohidrosis (i.e.,
the reduced ability to sweat) in the
affected area, even weeks after the heat
rash is no longer visible, which impairs
thermoregulation and can cause
predisposition for heat stress
(Sulzberger and Griffin, 1969; Pandolf et
al., 1980; DiBeneditto and Worobec,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70719
1985). This can impair an employee’s
ability to work and prevent resumption
of normal work activities in hot
environments to allow for the area to
heal, which in some cases can take 3–
4 weeks for heat intolerance to subside
(Pandolf et al., 1980).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
The development of heat rash has
been studied for centuries (Renbourn,
1958). While working in hot
environments with a high relative
humidity, the body’s ability to cool
itself is greatly reduced, as sweat is less
likely to evaporate from the skin
(Sulzberger and Griffin, 1969;
DiBeneditto and Worobec, 1985). Heat
rash occurs when sweat remains on the
skin and causes a blockage of sweat
(eccrine) glands and ducts (Wenzel and
Horn, 1998). Since the sweat ducts are
blocked, sweat secretions can leak and
accumulate beneath the skin, causing an
inflammatory response and resulting in
clusters of red bumps or pimples
(Dibeneditto and Worobec, 1985). If left
untreated, heat rash may become
infected (Holzle and Kligman, 1978).
Depending on the level of blockage, this
can manifest as various types of
miliaria, with miliaria rubra being the
most common form of heat rash (Wenzel
and Horn, 1998).
III. Occupational Heat Rash
Surveillance of heat rash in worker
populations is limited. However,
farmworkers have reported cases of skin
rash or skin bumps while working in
summer months (Bethel and Harger,
2014; Kearney et al., 2016; Luque et al.,
2020). From these studies, the
percentage of participants surveyed or
interviewed that report experiencing
skin rash or skin bumps in the previous
week were 10% (n=100, Beth and
Harger, 2014), 12.1% (n=158, Kearney et
al., 2016) and 5% (n=101, Luque et al.,
2020). Although these studies do not
purport a diagnosis, presentation of skin
rash or skin bumps while working in
hot environments with reported average
high temperatures ranging to the mid90s °F indicates respondents may have
developed heat rash.
Similar findings with diagnosis of
heat rash or related symptoms have
been recorded outside of the U.S. among
workers in the following professions:
17% of indoor electronics store
employees in air-conditioned (4%) and
non-air-conditioned (13%) areas in
Singapore (n=52, Koh, 1995); 2% of
underground miners at a site in
Australia (n=1,252, Donoghue and
Sinclair, 2000); 34% of maize farmers in
Nigeria (n=396, Sadiq et al., 2019); 68%
of sugarcane cutters and 23% of
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70720
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
sugarcane factory workers in Thailand
(n=183, Boonruksa et al., 2020); 41% of
sugarcane farmers in Thailand (n=200,
Kiatkitroj et al., 2021); 17% of
autorickshaw drivers (n=78), 23% of
outdoor street vendors (n=75), 16% of
street sweepers (n=75) in India (n=228,
Barthwal et al., 2022); and 13% of
underground and open pit miners across
Australia (n=515, Taggart et al., 2024).
Although these studies illustrate the
prevalence of heat rash in various
worker populations, OSHA notes that
differences in study methodologies and
the populations studied mean that the
results of these studies are not
necessarily directly comparable to each
other or to similar industries or worker
populations in the United States.
The type of clothing worn may also
contribute to formation of heat rash
while working in higher temperatures.
Heat rash was formally diagnosed
among U.S. military personnel wearing
flame resistant army combat uniforms in
hot and arid environments (102.2 °F to
122 °F (39 °C to 50 °C), 5% to 25%
relative humidity) (Carter et al., 2011).
In this case series, 18 patients with heat
rash presented with moderate to severe
skin irritation, which was worsened by
reactions to chemical additives not
removed from the laundering process
and increased heat retention from
sweat-soaked clothing, as well as the
friction from the fabric and the
occlusive effect of the clothing, which
allowed sweat to accumulate on the skin
despite the lower humidity (Carter et al.,
2011). This study calls attention to the
effect of clothing on the development of
heat rash and factors that may influence
its severity.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Although most cases of heat rash can
be self-treated without seeking medical
attention, symptoms typically last for
several days (Wenzel and Horn, 1998).
It is important that heat rash is kept dry
and cool to avoid possible infection.
Workers experiencing heat rash should
move to a cooler and less humid work
environment and avoid tight-fitting
clothing, when possible (NIOSH, 2022).
The affected area should be kept dry,
and ointments and creams, especially if
oil-based, should not be used (NIOSH,
2022). However, powder may be used
for relief.
V. Summary
The available evidence in the
scientific literature indicates that heat
rash can result from occupational heat
exposure. Although heat rash usually
resolves on its own without medical
attention, symptoms often persist for
several days and more severe cases can
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
impair an employee’s ability to work
and lead to infection if left untreated.
L. Heat Edema
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may
experience heat edema. Heat edema is
the swelling of soft tissues, typically in
the lower extremities (feet, ankles, and
legs) and hands, and may be
accompanied by facial flushing (Gauer
and Meyers, 2019). Surveillance systems
and the U.S. Army classify heat edema
as a heat-related illness (Department of
the Army, 2022). Workers who are
sitting or standing for prolonged periods
may be at higher risk for heat edema
(Barrow and Clark, 1998). Workers who
are not fully acclimatized to the work
site may be more prone to developing
heat edema as the body adjusts to hotter
temperatures (Howe and Boden, 2007).
II. Physiological Mechanism
When exposed to heat, the body
increases blood flow and induces
vasodilation to cool itself and
thermoregulate. This means, as blood is
shunted towards the skin and
vasodilation begins, the blood vessels
near the skin’s surface become wider
(Hough and Ballantyne, 1899; Kamijo et
al., 2005). However, blood can pool in
areas of the body that are most subject
to gravity (e.g., legs), and fluid can seep
from blood vessels causing noticeable
swelling under the skin—this is known
as heat edema (Gauer and Meyers,
2019).
III. Occupational Heat Edema
Surveillance of heat edema is limited.
Many studies include heat edema as one
of many HRIs that contributed to an
aggregate measure of HRI in worker,
military, or general populations, but
very few were found to quantify heat
edema alone.
Multiple studies outside of the U.S.
have examined HRIs among farm and
factory workers in the sugarcane
industry through surveys and interviews
(Crowe et al., 2015; Boonruksa et al.,
2020; Kiatkitroj et al., 2021; Debela et
al., 2023). Respondents in the studies
were asked if they experienced swelling
of the feet or hands (with varying
degrees of frequency) during periods of
heat exposure, which could indicate
presentation of heat edema. In different
samples of sugarcane workers in two
provinces of Thailand, two studies
found incidence of swelling of the
hands and feet. Among sugarcane
cutters, 16.7% self-reported ever
experiencing swelling of the hands or
feet and 5.6% self-reported experiencing
these symptoms (mean 30.6 °C WBGT)
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(n=90, Boonruksa et al., 2020). In
another province, 10.5% self-reported
swelling of the hands/feet while
working one summer (n=200, Kiatkitroj
et al., 2021).
While comparing HRI symptoms
among sugarcane harvesters and nonharvesters in Costa Rica, 15.1% of
harvesters (n=106) and 7.9% of nonharvesters (n=63) self-reported having
ever experienced swelling of hands/feet
(p=0.173) (n=169, Crowe et al., 2015).
While 7.5% of harvesters, who worked
outdoors in the field, self-reported
experiencing this symptom at least once
per week, no non-harvesters selfreported swelling with this level of
frequency (p=0.026) (Crowe et al., 2015).
The sample of non-harvesters included
both workers that were intermediately
exposed to heat (e.g., in the processing
plant or machinery shop) and workers
not exposed to heat (e.g., in offices).
In a sample of sugarcane factory
workers (n=1,524) in Ethiopia, 72.4%
(1,104) were considered exposed to heat
defined as conditions exceeding the
ACGIH’s TLV (Debela et al., 2023). Of
the total sample (including workers
considered exposed to heat and not),
78% (1,189) self-reported having
experienced swelling of hands and feet
at least once per week, which was the
most commonly reported HRI symptom
(Debela et al., 2023). Although these
studies do not purport a diagnosis,
presentation of swelling of the hands
and feet while working in hot
environments suggests respondents may
have developed heat edema.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Although most cases of heat edema
can be self-treated without seeking
medical attention, symptoms can last for
days and reoccurrence is less likely if
individuals are properly acclimatized
(Howe and Boden, 2007; Department of
the Army, 2023). It is important that the
affected individual moves out of the
heat and elevates the swollen area.
Diuretics are not typically
recommended for treatment (Howe and
Boden, 2007; Gauer and Meyers, 2019;
CDC, 2024a).
V. Summary
The available evidence in the
scientific literature indicates that heat
edema can result from occupational heat
exposure, causing swelling of the lower
extremities (feet, ankles, and legs) and
hands. It may be difficult to move
swollen body parts, thereby impeding
an employee’s ability to perform their
job. The need for medical attention can
typically be avoided if the condition is
properly treated.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
M. Kidney Health Effects
I. Introduction
The kidneys perform many functions
in the body, including filtering toxins
out of the blood and balancing the
body’s water and electrolyte levels
(NIDDK, 2018). Working in the heat
places a lot of demand on the kidneys
to conserve water and regulate
electrolytes, like sodium, lost through
sweat. A growing body of experimental
and observational literature suggests
that intense heat strain can cause
damage to the kidneys in the form of
acute kidney injury (AKI), even
independent of conditions like heat
stroke and rhabdomyolysis. An
epidemic of chronic kidney disease in
Central America and other regions
around the world has placed additional
attention on the potential of recurrent
heat stress-related AKI to cause chronic
kidney disease (CKD) over time
(Johnson et al., 2019; Schlader et al.,
2019). Working in the heat has also been
associated with the development of
kidney stones among workers outside
the U.S., likely a result of decreased
urine volume leading to increased
concentration of minerals in the urine
that crystallize into stones.
Each kidney is comprised of hundreds
of thousands of functional units called
nephrons. Each nephron has multiple
parts, including the glomerulus (a
cluster of blood vessels that conduct the
initial filtering of large molecules) and
the tubules (tubes that reabsorb needed
water and minerals and secrete waste
products). The fluid that remains after
traveling through the glomeruli and
tubules becomes urine and is eliminated
from the body (NIDDK, 2018).
This section will discuss three
kidney-related health effects associated
with heat exposure: kidney stones, AKI,
and CKD.
II. Kidney Stones
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Introduction
Kidney stones are hard objects that
form in the kidney from the
accumulation of minerals. They range in
size from a grain of sand to a pea
(NIDDK, 2017a). Symptoms include
sharp pain in the back, side, lower
abdomen, or groin; pink, red, or brown
blood in the urine; a constant need to
urinate; pain while urinating; inability
to urinate or only able to urinate a small
amount; and cloudy or foul-smelling
urine (NIDDK, 2017b). Nausea,
vomiting, fever, and chills are also
possible, and symptoms may be brief,
prolonged, or come in waves (NIDDK,
2017b). In rare cases or when medical
care is delayed, kidney stones can lead
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
to complications including severe pain,
urinary tract infections (UTI), and loss
of kidney function (NIDDK, 2017a). Risk
factors for kidney stones include being
male, a family history of kidney stones,
having previously had kidney stones,
not drinking enough liquids, other
medical conditions (e.g., chronic
inflammation of the bowel, digestive
problems, hyperparathyroidism,
recurrent UTIs), drinking sugary
beverages, and working in the heat,
especially if unacclimatized (NIDDK,
2017a; Maline and Goldfarb, 2024).
NIOSH has also cautioned workers that
experiencing chronic dehydration can
increase the risk of developing kidney
stones (NIOSH, 2017a).
B. Physiological Mechanisms
Kidney stones form when
concentrations of minerals are high
enough to the point of forming crystals,
which then aggregate into a stone in
either the renal tubular or interstitial
fluid (Ratkalkar and Kleinman, 2011).
Reduced urine volume, altered urine
pH, diet, genetics, or many other factors
may cause this concentration of
minerals (Ratkalker and Kleinman,
2011). Heat exposure has the potential
to cause kidney stones through heatinduced sweating and dehydration. Loss
of extracellular fluid increases
osmolality (i.e., increased concentration
of solutes, like sodium and glucose)
which leads to increased secretion of
vasopressin, an antidiuretic hormone.
Vasopressin signals to the kidneys to
conserve water by reducing urine
volume, leading to increased
concentration of relatively insoluble
salts, like calcium oxalate, in the urine.
These salts can eventually form crystals
which can develop into stones (Fakheri
and Goldfarb, 2011).
C. Occupational Heat Exposure and
Kidney Stones
Epidemiological studies conducted
outside the U.S. have documented the
association between working in heat
and developing kidney stones. One of
the earliest publications on
occupational heat and kidney stones
was a small study of beach lifeguards in
Israel (Better et al., 1980). Eleven of 45
randomly selected lifeguards (24%)
were found to have had kidney stones,
which Better et al. noted was
approximately 20 times the incidence
rate of the general Israeli population at
the time. The authors attributed this
finding to low urine output due to
dehydration, hyperuricemia (elevated
levels of uric acid in the blood), and
absorptive hypercalciuria (elevated
levels of calcium in the urine), among
other factors. In 1992, Pin et al.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70721
compared outdoor workers exposed to
hot environmental conditions to indoor
workers exposed to cooler conditions
(Pin et al., 1992). This study of 406 men
in Taiwan included quarry, postal, and
hospital engineering support workers.
The prevalence of kidney stones was
found to be significantly higher in the
outdoor workers than the indoor
workers (5.2% versus 0.85%, p<0.05).
The authors posited that chronic
dehydration from working outdoors in a
tropical environment might explain the
higher prevalence of kidney stones
among outdoor workers (Pin et al.,
1992).
Several studies have also considered
occupational exposure to indoor heat
sources. Borghi et al. studied machinists
who had been working in the blast
furnaces of a glass plant in Parma, Italy
for five or more years, excluding those
who had kidney stones before working
at the plant (Borghi et al., 1993). The
prevalence of kidney stones was
significantly higher among machinists
exposed to heat (n=236) than among
those working in cooler temperatures
(n=165) (8.5% vs. 2.4%, p=0.03) (Borghi
et al., 1993). An analysis of risk factors
revealed that workers in the heat lost
substantially more water to sweat and
that their urine had higher
concentrations of uric acid, higher
specific gravity, and lower pH than
workers in normal temperatures (Borghi
et al., 1993).
In a large study in Brazil, the
prevalence of at least one episode of
kidney stones was 8.0% among the
1,289 workers in hot areas, which was
significantly higher than the 1.75%
prevalence found among the 9,037
people working in room temperature
conditions (p<0.001) (Atan et al., 2005).
An analysis of a subset of workers
demonstrated that workers in hot
temperatures had significantly less
citrate in their urine (p=0.03) and lower
urinary volume (p=0.01) compared to
room-temperature workers.
Venugopal et al. studied 340 steel
workers in southern India engaged in
moderate to heavy labor with three or
more years of heat exposure (Venugopal
et al., 2020). Of the 340 participants, 91
workers without other risk factors for
kidney disease, but who had reported a
symptom of kidney or urethral issues,
underwent renal ultrasounds, which
revealed that 27% had kidney stones.
84% of the participants with kidney
stones were occupationally exposed to
heat, as defined as working in
conditions above the ACGIH TLV.
Having five or more years of heat
exposure was significantly associated
with risk of kidney stones, while
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70722
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
controlling for smoking (OR: 3.6, 95%
CI: 1.2, 10.7).
Most recently, Lu et al. studied 1,681
steel workers in Taiwan, 12% of whom
had kidney stones, compared to the ageadjusted prevalence among men in
Taiwan of 9% (Lu et al., 2022). Heat
exposure was found to be positively
associated with prevalence of stones,
particularly among workers ≤35 years
old (OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.2, 6.0) (Lu et al.,
2022).
Overall, the peer-reviewed literature
supports occupational heat exposure as
a risk factor for kidney stones, in both
indoor and outdoor environments,
across multiple countries, and in several
industries.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment of kidney stones depends
on their size, location, and type.
Someone with a small kidney stone may
be able to pass it by drinking plenty of
water and taking pain medications as
prescribed by a doctor (NIDDK, 2017c).
Larger kidney stones can block the
urinary tract, cause intense pain, and
may require medical intervention such
as shock wave lithotripsy, cystoscopy,
ureteroscopy, or percutaneous
nephrolithotomy to remove or break up
the stone (NIDDK, 2017c). Percutaneous
nephrolithotomy, whereby kidney
stones are removed through a surgical
incision in the skin, requires several
days of hospitalization, but the other
interventions typically do not require an
overnight hospital stay (NIDDK, 2017c).
One study found that among working
aged adults, approximately one third of
people treated for kidney stones miss
work and that they miss, on average, 19
hours of work per person (Saigal et al.,
2005). With monitoring or treatment,
people typically recover from kidney
stones. However, over the long term,
individuals who develop kidney stones
are at increased risk of chronic kidney
disease and end-stage renal disease,
particularly if kidney stones are
recurrent (Uribarri, 2020).
E. Summary
The available peer-reviewed scientific
literature demonstrates occupational
heat exposure as a risk factor for kidney
stones, in both indoor and outdoor
environments. Kidney stones may
require medical treatment and in some
cases hospitalization. Finally,
individuals who develop kidney stones
are at increased risk of other kidney
diseases.
III. Acute Kidney Injury
A. Introduction
Acute kidney injury (AKI) can affect
workers exposed to occupational heat.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
AKI is an abrupt decline in kidney
function in a short period (e.g., a few
days). As normally functioning kidneys
filter blood and maintain fluid balance
in the body, AKI events can disrupt this
fluid balance, which can impact major
organs like the heart. AKI can also have
metabolic consequences, like a build-up
of too much potassium in the blood
(hyperkalemia) (Goyal et al., 2023). AKI
is not always accompanied by
symptoms and is typically diagnosed
with blood and/or urine tests (e.g.,
increase in serum creatinine). While
damage to the kidneys is one potential
consequence of heat stroke (such as in
the context of multi-organ failure, as
mentioned in Section IV.E., Heat
Stroke), this section is focused on AKI
that is not necessarily preceded by
clinical heat stroke.
B. Physiological Mechanisms
There are three categories of AKI used
to distinguish the location of the
cause(s) of AKI—prerenal, intrarenal,
and postrenal (Goyal et al., 2023).
Prerenal AKI represents a reduction in
blood volume being delivered to the
kidneys (i.e., renal hypoperfusion). This
can be the result of heat-induced
sweating that leads to reduced
circulating blood volume. Prerenal AKI
that is reversed (e.g., dehydration is
quickly reversed) is typically not
associated with impairment to the
kidney glomeruli or tubules, however
prolonged exposure can lead to direct
injury to renal cells through ischemia
(inadequate blood and oxygen supply to
cells). Intrarenal AKI is when the
function of the glomeruli, tubules, or
interstitium are affected, such as in the
case of nephrotoxic exposures (e.g.,
heavy metals) or prolonged ischemia.
Rhabdomyolysis, which was previously
discussed in Section IV.H.,
Rhabdomyolysis, is one potential cause
of necrosis of tubular cells resulting
from myoglobin precipitation and direct
iron toxicity (Sauret et al., 2002, Patel et
al., 2009). Postrenal AKI is when there
is an obstruction to the flow of urine,
such as kidney stones, pelvic masses, or
prostate enlargement. Postrenal AKI is
less relevant to a discussion of heatrelated health effects, apart from kidney
stones, which is discussed in Section
IV.M.II., Kidney Stones.
Researchers have written specifically
about potential mechanisms leading
from occupational heat exposure to AKI
(Roncal-Jiménez et al., 2015; Johnson et
al., 2019; Schlader et al., 2019; Hansson
et al., 2020), often in the context of
chronic kidney disease. As previously
discussed in Section IV.B., General
Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health
Effects, working in the heat can lead to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
increases in core temperature and
reductions in circulating blood volume.
Researchers hypothesize that elevated
core temperature could directly injure
renal tissue or that injury could be
mediated through subclinical (mild and
asymptomatic) rhabdomyolysis or
increases in intestinal permeability that
can cause inflammation. Reductions in
blood volume could inflame or injure
the kidneys through reduced renal
blood flow that leads to ischemia and/
or local reductions in adenosine
triphosphate (ATP) availability.
Reduced blood flow and increased
blood osmolality also trigger physiologic
pathways (e.g., renin-angiotensinaldosterone system, polyol-fructokinase
pathway) which are energy-intensive
and may lead to oxidative stress and
inflammation. Other mechanistic
pathways under investigation include
urate crystal-induced injury (RoncalJiménez et al., 2015) and increased
reabsorption of nephrotoxicants
(Johnson et al., 2019).
C. Identifying Cases of Acute Kidney
Injury
Serum creatinine levels are used in
clinical settings to estimate kidney
function (glomerular filtration rate, or
GFR), as it is typically produced in the
body at a relatively stable rate and is
removed from circulation by the
kidneys. Multiple criteria exist for
defining AKI based on increases in
serum creatinine over hours or days,
such as the KDIGO criteria published by
a non-profit organization that produces
recommendations on kidney disease
(KDIGO, 2012). There are multiple
factors that could affect the reliability of
using serum creatinine to estimate GFR,
including the increased production of
creatinine during exercise. As a result of
the limitations of serum creatinine,
there is growing use of alternative
biomarkers to identify cases of AKI,
which may be more reliable and specific
to AKI, such as neutrophil gelatinaseassociated lipocalin, or NGAL.
D. Experimental Evidence
Researchers have documented an
association between heat strain and
biomarkers of AKI in controlled
experimental conditions. In 2013,
Junglee et al. documented elevations in
urine and plasma NGAL and reductions
in urine flow rate in participants after a
heat stress trial that induced elevations
in core temperature and reductions in
body mass (an indication of hydration
status) (Junglee et al., 2013). These
increases in NGAL were higher in an
experimental group that underwent a
muscle damaging, downhill (¥10%
gradient) run (compared to a non-
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
muscle damaging run on a 1% gradient)
prior to the heat stress trial, providing
support for the argument that
subclinical rhabdomyolysis may be a
pathway from heat stress to kidney
injury. Schlader et al. conducted a trial
in which participants wearing
firefighting gear completed two separate
exercise trials in hot conditions of
different durations. The longer duration
trial was intended to induce higher
levels of heat strain, while the shorter
duration was intended to induce lower
levels (Schlader et al., 2017). The
researchers found that the longer trial
was associated with elevated core
temperature and reduced blood volume,
as well as increases in serum creatinine
and plasma NGAL, suggesting the
magnitude of kidney injury may be
proportional to the magnitude of heat
strain. McDermott et al. tested longer
durations of exercise in the heat (5.7 ±
1.2 hours) and similarly found
elevations in serum creatinine and
serum NGAL from before the trial to
after (McDermott et al., 2018). To
determine whether it is elevated core
temperature or reduced blood volume
that primarily drives heat-induced AKI,
Chapman et al. conducted four trials in
which subjects exercised for two hours
in the same conditions, but received
different interventions (water, cooling,
water plus cooling, and no intervention)
(Chapman et al., 2020). The group with
no intervention had the highest levels of
urinary AKI biomarkers in the recovery
period, whereas the water and cooling
groups each experienced reductions in
AKI biomarker levels relative to the
control group. The researchers
concluded that limiting hyperthermia
and/or dehydration reduces the risk of
AKI.
The relationship between AKI and
hyperthermia and/or dehydration has
also been demonstrated in animal
models (Hope and Tyssebotn 1983;
Miyamoto 1994; Roncal-Jiménez et al.,
2014; Sato et al., 2019).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
E. Cases of Occupational Heat-Related
AKI
In addition to experimental evidence,
heat-related AKI has also been observed
in ‘‘real world’’ conditions going back to
the 1960s. In 1967, Schrier et al.
documented evidence of military
recruits developing AKI (referred to as
‘‘acute renal failure’’) following training
exercises in the heat (Schrier et al.,
1967). It was soon after reported that
AKI cases linked to exercise in the heat
represented a sizeable portion
(approximately 10%) of all AKI cases
treated at Walter Reed General Hospital
in the early 1960s (Schrier et al., 1970).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
More recently, serum creatininedefined AKI has been observed in
agricultural workers in both Florida and
California. Among a cohort of field
workers from the Central Valley of
California, Moyce et al. report a postwork shift incidence of AKI of 12.3%
(35 of 283 workers) (Moyce et al., 2017).
Workers with heat strain, characterized
by increased core temperature and heart
rate, were significantly more likely to
have AKI (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.74).
Among a cohort of agricultural workers
in Florida, Mix et al. found that heat
index (based on nearest weather
monitor) was positively associated with
the risk of AKI—47% increase in the
odds of AKI for every 5 °F increase in
heat index. The authors reported an
incidence of AKI of 33% (i.e., 33% of
workers had AKI on at least one day of
monitoring) in this study (Mix et al.,
2018).
OSHA researchers have also
identified cases of heat-related AKI
among workers in the agency’s own
databases: the Severe Injury Reports
(SIR) database and case files from
consultations by the Office of
Occupational Medicine and Nursing
(OOMN) (Shi et al., 2022). Shi et al.
identified 22 cases of heat-related AKI
between 2010 and 2020 in the OOMN
consultation records (based on serum
creatine elevations meeting the KDIGO
requirements) after excluding cases
related to severe hyperthermia, multiorgan failure, or death. Using inclusion
criteria of a heat-related OIICS code
(172*) and a mention of AKI in the
narrative, they also identified 57 cases
of probable heat-related AKI between
2015 and 2020 in the SIR database.
Studies conducted among workers
outside the U.S. have also reported a
relationship between working in the
heat and acute elevations in serum
creatinine or increased risk of AKI
(Garcı́a-Trabanino et al., 2015; Wegman
et al., 2018; Nerbass et al., 2019;
Sorensen et al., 2019).
There are a few limitations to these
observational studies, such as the use of
serum creatinine to characterize AKI, as
described above. An additional
limitation is the inability to determine
from these studies whether the AKI
observed is due to prerenal or intrarenal
causes. As discussed in Physiological
Mechanisms, prerenal AKI may be due
to reductions in renal blood flow (which
would be expected in cases of
dehydration) and is not necessarily
indicative of clinically significant
structural injury. Another limitation
may be the use of serum creatinine
measures taken over relatively short
spans of time, which may be too short
to see true reductions in GFR (Waikar
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70723
and Bonventre, 2009). However, there
are a growing number of studies that
find a relationship between short-term
fluctuations in serum creatinine and
longer-term declines in kidney function
among outdoor workers (see discussion
in Section IV.M.IV., Chronic Kidney
Disease).
F. Treatment and Recovery
There is a spectrum of severity for
AKI. For example, some individuals
may not know they are experiencing
AKI without a serum or urine test. There
is also a spectrum of time and medical
treatment needed for recovery,
dependent on whether the AKI is
quickly reversed or sustained for longer
periods of time. In Schlader et al. 2017,
researchers noted that the biomarkers of
AKI for participants in their trial
returned to baseline the following day.
However, intrarenal causes of AKI may
require longer periods of time for
recovery and may potentially require
the need for medication or dialysis
(Goyal et al., 2023). AKI can be severe,
which can be the case when resulting
from heat stroke, where it may represent
irreversible damage to the kidneys and
can be fatal (Roberts et al., 2008; King
et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2021). Recurrent
AKI may also lead to chronic kidney
disease (as discussed in Section
IV.M.IV., Chronic Kidney Disease).
G. Summary
The available peer-reviewed scientific
literature, both experimental and
observational studies, suggests that
occupational heat exposure causes AKI
among workers. However, there are
limitations in the case definitions used
to define AKI in observational settings.
IV. Chronic Kidney Disease
A. Introduction
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a
progressive disease characterized by a
gradual decline in kidney function over
months to years. It is typically
asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic
until later stages of the disease, when
symptoms such as edema, weight loss,
nausea, and vomiting can occur (NIDDK
2017d). People with CKD can be at a
greater risk for other health conditions,
like AKI, heart attacks, hypertension,
and stroke. The diagnosis typically
requires multiple blood and urine tests
taken over time (NIDDK 2016). Typical
risk factors for CKD include
hypertension and diabetes.
Epidemics of CKD in Central America
and other pockets of the world, such as
India and Sri Lanka, that appear to be
afflicting mostly young, outdoor
workers with no history of hypertension
or diabetes have raised questions about
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70724
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
whether working in hot conditions can
cause the development of CKD (Johnson
et al., 2019). Researchers have been
investigating this question and the cause
of the epidemic over the past 20 years,
including other potential exposures,
such as heavy metals, agrichemicals,
silica, and infectious agents (Crowe et
al., 2020).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Physiological Mechanisms
Researchers have proposed that
working in the heat could lead to the
development of CKD through repetitive
AKI events (see discussion of heatrelated mechanisms in Section IV.M.III.,
Acute Kidney Injury). However, some
researchers acknowledge the possibility
that the unexplained CKD cases
observed in Central America and
elsewhere may instead represent a
chronic disease process that begins
earlier in life which places workers at
increased risk of AKI (Johnson et al.,
2019; Schlader et al., 2019).
Additionally, as discussed above in
Section IV.M.III., Acute Kidney Injury,
some occupational cases of AKI could
be transient, the result of prerenal
causes, and possibly unrelated to the
development of CKD.
Independent of the epidemic of
unexplained CKD, frequent and/or
severe AKI has been identified as a risk
factor for developing CKD (Ishani et al.,
2009; Coca et al., 2012; Chawla et al.,
2014; Hsu and Hsu 2016; Heung et al.,
2016). The relationship between heatrelated AKI and risk of developing CKD
is untested in the experimental
literature because of the ethical
implications (Schlader et al., 2019;
Hansson et al., 2020).
As discussed in Section IV.E., Heat
Stroke, there is also evidence that
experiencing heat stroke may increase
an individual’s risk of developing CKD
(Wang et al., 2019; Tseng et al., 2020).
C. Identifying Cases of Chronic Kidney
Disease
As discussed previously in the
context of AKI, serum creatinine is
commonly used to estimate glomerular
filtration rate (GFR), the indicator of
kidney function. When measures of
serum creatinine (and therefore
estimates of GFR) are taken over periods
of months to years, medical
professionals can determine if an
individual’s kidney function is
declining. CKD is typically diagnosed
when the estimated GFR is below a rate
of 60 mL/min/1.73m2 for at least 3
months, although there are other
indicators, like a high albumin-tocreatinine ratio. There are various stages
of CKD; the final stage is called endstage renal disease (ESRD) and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
represents a point at which the kidneys
can no longer function on their own and
require dialysis or transplant.
D. Observational Evidence
There is a growing body of evidence
that suggests that heat-exposed workers
who experience AKI (or short-term
fluctuations in serum creatinine) are at
greater risk of experiencing declines in
kidney function over a period of months
to years. For instance, sugarcane
workers in Nicaragua who experienced
cross-shift increases (i.e., increase from
pre-shift to post-shift) in serum
creatinine at the beginning of the
harvest season were more likely to
experience declines in estimate GFR
nine weeks later (Wesseling et al., 2016).
Another study conducted among
Nicaraguan sugarcane workers found
that approximately one third of workers
who experienced AKI during the harvest
season had newly decreased kidney
function (greater than 30% decline) and
a measure of estimated GFR of less than
60 mL/min/1.73m2 one year later
(Kupferman et al., 2018). In an analysis
among Guatemalan sugarcane workers,
Dally et al. found that workers with
severe fluctuations in serum creatinine
over a period of 6 workdays had greater
declines in estimated GFR (¥20% on
average) (Dally et al., 2020). In a
separate study conducted in Northwest
Mexico, researchers observed declines
in estimated GFR among migrant and
seasonal farm workers from March to
July that were not observed in a
reference group of office workers in the
same region (López-Gálvez et al., 2021).
Further support for the hypothesis
that working in the heat may lead to
declines in GFR and increased risk of
CKD comes from intervention studies in
Central America, in which workers were
given water-rest-shade interventions
and observed longitudinally for kidney
outcomes. In these studies,
implementation of the heat stress
controls was associated with reductions
in the declines in kidney function and
reduced rates of kidney injury (Glaser et
al., 2020; Wegman et al., 2018).
While much of the literature is
focused on Central American workers,
OSHA did identify one paper conducted
among a cohort of U.S. firefighters.
Pinkerton et al. (2022) found lower than
expected rates of ESRD in the cohort
(relative to the general U.S. population)
despite high levels of occupational
exposure to heat. However, as the
authors point out, this may be due to the
healthy worker effect (i.e., a
phenomenon in occupational
epidemiology by which workers appear
to be healthier than the general
population due to individuals with
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
health conditions leaving the workforce)
(Pinkerton et al., 2022). The authors also
examined associations between proxies
for heat exposure and risk of developing
ESRD and found non-significant
associations between the number of
exposed days and all-cause ESRD,
systemic ESRD, and hypertensive ESRD.
Very few of the ESRD cases identified in
this cohort were due to interstitial
nephritis (which would be most
consistent with the CKD cases observed
in Central America), limiting the
authors’ ability to examine associations
between those cases and exposure.
There may be differences between the
heat-exposed worker populations in
Central America and the U.S. that could
limit the ability to extrapolate findings
from that region, such as differences in
other potentially nephrotoxic exposures
(e.g., agrichemicals, infectious agents).
There is also evidence that children in
regions with epidemics of unexplained
CKD have signs of kidney injury (Leibler
et al., 2021). Unfortunately, surveillance
of CKD in the U.S. (namely the U.S.
Renal Data System) may be missing
cases among susceptible workers, such
as migrant agricultural workers, limiting
the ability to detect a potential epidemic
of heat-related CKD in this country.
In addition to the general lack of
studies conducted among U.S. workers,
there may be other limitations with
these observational studies, such as
limited data on longer-term follow-up
(i.e., years instead of months) and the
potential for reverse causality (i.e.,
undetected CKD is causing AKI).
E. Treatment and Recovery
Often kidney disease gets worse over
time and function continues to decline
as scarring occurs (NIDDK 2017d). As
discussed above, late-stage CKD (or
ESRD) requires dialysis or a kidney
transplant for an individual to survive.
Kidney failure is permanent. Having
even early-stage CKD may impair
workers’ urine concentrating ability,
which could increase their heat strain
and risk of HRIs while working
(Petropoulos et al., 2023).
F. Summary
There is growing evidence suggesting
that heat stress and dehydration may be
contributing to an epidemic of CKD
among workers in Central America and
other parts of the world, although the
cause is still being investigated by
researchers. There is currently limited
information as to whether this type of
CKD is affecting U.S. workers and if so,
to what extent. Experiencing heat stroke
has been identified in the literature as
a risk factor for developing CKD.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
N. Other Health Effects
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Introduction
In addition to the health effects
discussed in the previous sub-sections,
heat exposures have also been linked to
reproductive health effects.
Additionally, health effects have been
associated with prior episodes of heat
illness.
II. Reproductive and Developmental
Health Effects
There is mixed evidence that heat
affects reproductive and developmental
health outcomes. NIOSH reported two
mechanisms by which heat may affect
reproductive and developmental health:
infertility (e.g., such as through
damaged sperm) and teratogenicity
(harm to the developing fetus, e.g.,
spontaneous abortion or birth defects)
(NIOSH, 2016). NIOSH concluded that
while human data about reproductive
risks at exposure limits (see NIOSH,
2016, table 5–1, p. 70) were limited,
results of research and animal
experiments support the conclusion
heat-related infertility and teratogenicity
are possible (NIOSH, 2016, p. 91).
More recent evidence, although also
limited, continues to provide support of
a reproductive risk to people who are
pregnant and developmental risk to
their children. Numerous
epidemiological studies have reported
that heat exposure during pregnancy is
associated with poor outcomes, such as
pre-term labor and birth and low-birth
weight babies (e.g., Kuehn and
McCormick, 2017; Basu et al., 2018;
Chersich et al., 2020; Rekha et al., 2023).
While most studies assess this
relationship in the general population of
pregnant women and do not specifically
address occupational exposures, Rekha
et al. show that occupational exposures
to heat were associated with adverse
pregnancy and fetal outcomes, as well
as adverse outcomes during birth in a
cohort of pregnant women in Tamil
Nadu, India (Rekha et al., 2023).
Although the mechanisms for these
outcomes are unclear, a study of
pregnant women conducting
agricultural work or similar activities for
their homes in The Gambia reported an
association between heat exposure and
fetal strain (through measures of fetal
heart rate and umbilical artery
resistance) (Bonell et al., 2022). Further,
a recent longitudinal prospective cohort
study in Germany found that heat
exposure was associated with vascular
changes in the uterine artery. This study
reports that changes of increased
placental perfusion and decreased
peripheral resistance in the uterine
artery indicate blood redistribution to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the fetus during the body’s response to
heat stress. They also report increased
maternal cardiovascular strain. This
data may support a mechanistic role for
uterine and placental blood flow
changes during heat exposures in
resultant birth outcomes, such as preterm birth (Yuzen et al., 2023; Bonell et
al., 2022).
There is evidence that occupational
heat exposures can affect male
reproductive health (e.g., Mieusset and
Bujan, 1995). Some research studies
report associations between
occupational heat exposure and time to
conceive (e.g., Rachootin and Olsen,
1983; Thonneau et al., 1997), sperm
velocity (Figa-Talamanca et al., 1992),
and measures of semen quality such as
sperm abnormalities (Rachootin and
Olsen, 1983; Bonde, 1992; FigaTalamanca et al., 1992; De Fleurian et
al., 2009). Effects of heat on sperm have
also been demonstrated in experiments
in animal models (Waites, 1991). Cao et
al. report that in their study of heat
stress in mice, heat stress reduced
sperm count and motility (Cao et al.,
2023). In this study, the heat exposed
mice were exposed to 38°C (100.4 °F)
temperatures for 2 hours per day for two
weeks. When the mice were not being
exposed to heat, they were kept at 25°C
(77 °F). Control mice were kept at 25°C
for the duration of the study. Their
study results indicate that reduced
sperm quality may be a result of
disrupted testicular microbial
environment and disruption in retinol
metabolism that occurs during heat
stress. Although, the authors note that
the heat exposure does not accurately
mimic real world heat exposures in
humans.
While it is accepted that heat impairs
spermatogenesis, or development of
sperm (e.g., MacLeod and Hotchkiss,
1941; Mieusset et al., 1987; Thonneau et
al., 1997), some studies of occupational
heat exposure find no relationship
between heat and semen quality
(Eisenberg ML et al., 2015). Another
study found observable but not
statistically significant associations
between heat and semen quality
(Jurewicz et al., 2014). Many studies of
the effects of occupational heat
exposure on reproductive outcomes are
cross-sectional in nature and measure
exposures through occupation
categories or self-report answers on
questionnaires (e.g., Figa-Talamanca et
al., 1992; Thonneau et al., 1997;
Jurewicz et al., 2014). These methods
can be susceptible to recall bias and
misclassification errors, which can
reduce accuracy in characterizing the
association between occupational heat
exposures and reproductive health
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70725
outcomes, and they are also unable to
determine causality on their own.
Additional research that quantifies
occupational heat exposures directly
(e.g., through measures of heat strain or
on-site temperatures) would help to
clarify the impacts of occupational heat
exposures on male reproductive
outcomes.
III. Health Effects Associated With Prior
Episodes of Heat Illness
A limited number of studies have
focused on a variety of long-term effects
following a prior episode of heat illness.
This includes research by Wallace et al.,
also reviewed by NIOSH in the 2016
Criteria for a Recommended Standard
Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments, whose retrospective case
control study of military members found
that those who experienced an
exertional heat illness event earlier in
life were more likely to die due to
cardiovascular or ischemic heart disease
(Wallace et al., 2007). Similarly, Wang
et al. reports that, in their retrospective
cohort study in Taiwan, prior heat
stroke was associated with a higher
incidence of acute ischemic stroke,
acute myocardial infarction, and an
almost three-fold higher incidence of
chronic kidney disease compared to
patients who had other forms of heat
illness or compared to the control group
that had no prior heat illness, over the
study’s 14 year follow-up period (Wang
et al., 2019). They also found
significantly higher incidence of
cardiovascular events, cardiovascular
disease, and chronic kidney disease
among individuals in the study who had
other forms of heat illness (heat
syncope, heat cramps, heat exhaustion,
heat fatigue, heat edema and other
unspecified effects) compared to the
control group that had no prior heat
illness. In a long-term follow-up study
of military personnel who had
experienced exertional heat illness,
Phinney et al. reported a transient and
small but observable increase in the rate
of subsequent hospitalizations and
decreased retention in the military
(Phinney et al., 2001). While these
studies suggest a relationship between
episodes of serious heat illness and
subsequent health effects, this body of
research is small and subject to some
limitations. The cross-sectional nature
of some of these studies does not allow
for determination of causality on their
own. Additionally, given the
retrospective nature of some of these
studies it is possible that important
confounding variables were not adjusted
for in analyses, including occupation in
some cases.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70726
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
IV. Summary
The description of evidence presented
here demonstrates that there is some
evidence to support a link between
occupational heat exposures and
adverse reproductive health outcomes.
There is also limited evidence that prior
episodes of heat illness may affect
health outcomes later in life such as
increased risk of cardiovascular disease
and kidney diseases. This evidence of
reproductive and developmental health
effects and health effects associated
with prior episodes of heat illness,
while suggestive, is still nascent and
requires further investigation.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
O. Factors That Affect Risk for HeatRelated Health Effects
I. Introduction
This section discusses individual risk
factors for heat-related injury and
illness. The purpose of this discussion
is to summarize the factors that may
exacerbate the risk of workplace heatrelated hazards and to provide
information to better inform workers
and employers about those hazards.
However, exposure to workplace heat
contributes to heat stress for all workers
and can be detrimental to workers’
health and safety regardless of
individual risk factors. OSHA is not
suggesting that application of the
proposed standard would depend on an
employer’s knowledge or analysis of
these factors for their individual
workers. Nor do these individual risk
factors detract from the causal link
between occupational exposure to heat
and adverse safety and health outcomes
or an employer’s obligation to address
that occupational risk (see Reich v.
Arcadian Corp., 110 F.3d 1192, 1198
(5th Cir. 1997) (Congress intended the
Act to protect all employees, ‘‘regardless
of their individual susceptibilities’’);
Pepperidge Farm, Inc., 17 O.S.H. Cas.
(BNA) ¶ 1993 (O.S.H.R.C. Apr. 26, 1997)
(that non-workplace factors may render
some workers more susceptible to
causal factors does not preclude finding
the existence of an occupational
hazard); see also Bldg. & Const. Trades
Dep’t, AFL–CIO v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258,
1265 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (holding that
OSHA did not err in including smokers
in its analysis of the significant risk
posed by occupational exposure to
asbestos, despite the ‘‘synergistic
effects’’ of smoking and asbestos)).
Many factors can influence an
individual’s risk of developing heatrelated health effects. These factors
include variation in genetics and
physiology, demographic factors, certain
co-occurring health conditions or
illnesses, acclimatization status, certain
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
medications and substances, and
structural factors (e.g., economic,
environmental, political and
institutional factors) that lead to
disproportionate exposures and
outcomes. Although there is a lack of
evidence that explores the full extent to
which these factors interact to affect
heat-related health effects, or how
various risk factors compare in their
impacts, there is evidence that each of
these factors can affect risk of heatrelated health effects. This section
focuses on factors that relate to an
individual’s health status. For an indepth discussion on acclimatization as
a risk factor, see Section V., Risk
Assessment, and for an in-depth
discussion on demographic factors and
structural factors that affect risk of heatrelated illness, see Section VIII.I.,
Distributional Analysis.
II. Risk Factors
There are a number of factors that can
impact an individual’s response to heat
stress and lead to variation in heat stress
response between individuals. These
include variation in genotype (Heled et
al., 2004), gene expression (Murray et
al., 2022), body mass and differences in
thermoregulation between the biological
sexes (Notley et al., 2017), differences in
thermoregulation as people age (e.g.,
Pandolf 1997, Kenny et al., 2010; Kenny
et al., 2017), and pregnancy (Wells,
2002; NIOSH, 2016). Normal variation
across individuals in genetics,
physiology, and body mass results in
variation in how individuals respond to
heat stress. There is some evidence that,
at least in some specific populations,
variation in genotype (i.e., genetic
makeup) can affect heat storage and heat
strain (Heled et al., 2004; Gardner et al.,
2020). Normal variation in body mass
can also correspond to variation in
thermoregulation between individuals
(e.g., Havenith et al., 1998). Results from
Havenith et al.’s experimental study of
heat stress under different climate and
exercise types indicates that one reason
for this effect may be due to the
relationship between size and surface
area of the skin which plays an
important role in cooling capacity
(Havenith et al., 1998). A more detailed
discussion of the relationship between
obesity and heat stress response can be
found below.
There is some evidence that biological
sex could be considered a risk factor for
heat-related illness, although the
evidence is mixed. Some studies find
differences in heat stress response
between males and females (e.g.,
Gagnon et al., 2008; Gagnon and Kenny,
2011; Gagnon and Kenny, 2012). These
differences may be due to differences in
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
body mass (Notley et al., 2017), lower
sweat output in females or differences
in metabolic heat production (Gagnon et
al., 2008; Gagnon and Kenny, 2012).
However, recent experimental data
assessing differences in thermoeffector
responses (autonomic responses that
affect thermoregulation, such as skin
blood flow and sweat rate) between
males and females exposed to exercise
show that differences between the sexes
in heat stress response are mostly
explained by differences in morphology
(body shape and size and the resultant
mass-surface ratios) (Notley et al., 2017).
Although, Notley et al.’s (2017)
experiment only involved heat
environments where enough heat could
be lost so that the body does not
continue to gain heat (compensable heat
stress), so it is unclear if an increased
effect due to biological sex would occur
in conditions where heat gain is
expected, such as in occupational
settings where environmental heat or
environmental heat and exertion exceed
the body’s ability to cool.
Healthy aging processes can also
make individuals more susceptible to
heat-related illness. Aging may impact
thermoregulation through reduced
cardiovascular capacity (Minson et al.,
1998; Lucas et al., 2015), reduced
cutaneous vasodilation (the widening of
blood vessels at the skin to aid heat
loss), sweat rate, altered sensory
function (Dufour and Candas, 2007;
Wong and Hollowed, 2017), and
changes in fluid balance and thirst
sensation (Pandolf, 1997). Observational
evidence tends to show that elderly
individuals, particularly those with coexisting chronic or acute diseases, are at
highest risk for morbidity or mortality
related to heat exposures, and that risk
increases with age (e.g., Semenza et al.,
1999; Fouillet et al., 2006; Knowlton et
al., 2008). However, experimental
evidence shows that, under certain
conditions, when individuals are
matched for fitness level and body build
and composition, middle-aged
individuals can compensate for heat
exposures similarly to younger adults
(Lind et al., 1970; Pandolf, 1997, Kenny
et al., 2017). Conversely, observational
studies of occupational populations
often find that younger workers
experience greater rates of heat-related
illness than do older workers (e.g.,
Harduar Morano et al., 2015; Hesketh et
al., 2020; Heinzerling et al., 2020).
While it is unclear why younger
workers appear to have greater rates of
heat-related illness in epidemiological
data, Heinzerling et al. (2020) suggest
that this could be a result of a greater
number of younger workers being
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
employed in high-risk occupations.
Further, younger workers have less
work experience, meaning that younger
workers are less familiar with the heat
risks associated with their jobs, how
their body responds to heat, and/or how
to respond if they experience symptoms
of heat-related illness.
Health status is another factor that
plays a role in how someone responds
to heat stress (e.g., Semenza et al., 1999;
Knowlton et al., 2008; NIOSH, 2016;
Vaidyanathan et al., 2019, 2020).
Conditions such as cardiovascular
disease and diabetes can affect risk of
heat-related illness (e.g., Kenny et al.,
2016; Kenny et al., 2018). The
cardiovascular system plays an integral
role in thermoregulation and heat stress
response (Costrini et al., 1979; Lucas et
al., 2015; Wong and Hollowed, 2017;
Kenny et al., 2018). Cardiovascular
diseases can affect the heart and blood
vessels, increasing cardiovascular strain
and decreasing cardiovascular function
and thermoregulatory capacity (Kenny
et al., 2010) and, as a result, increase
risk of heat-related illness during heat
stress (Kenny et al., 2010; Semenza et
al., 1999). For example, people with
hypertension (i.e., high blood pressure)
may be at increased risk of heat-related
illness due to changes in skin blood
flow that can impair heat dissipation
during heat stress (Kenny et al., 2010).
Further, many individuals with
hypertension and cardiovascular
diseases may take prescription
medications that reduce
thermoregulatory functions, through
mechanisms like reduced blood flow to
the skin, which can increase sensitivity
to heat (Wee et al., 2023). Studies
estimate that a substantial percentage of
the population, and therefore the
population of workers, have the type of
health status (i.e., having a chronic
condition such as cardiovascular
diseases) (Boersma et al., 2020; Watson
et al., 2022) that could affect their
response to heat stress. For example,
Watson et al. (2022) estimate that of the
46,781 surveyed adults between the ages
of 18 and 34 who reported being
employed, 26.1% have obesity, 11%
have high blood pressure, and 9.7%
have high cholesterol. Additionally,
19.4% were estimated to have
depression, which is sometimes treated
with medications that can affect
thermoregulation.
Diabetes and obesity are other factors
that may affect risk of developing heatrelated illness (Kenny et al., 2016). Both
diabetes and obesity may affect
thermoregulation by reducing a person’s
ability to dissipate heat through changes
in skin blood flow and sweat response
(Kenny et al., 2016). While some
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
evidence shows that individuals with
well-controlled diabetes may be able to
maintain normal thermoregulatory
capacity (Kenny et al., 2016), some
evidence indicates that individuals with
poorly controlled diabetes (Kenny et al.,
2016) or older individuals with Type 2
diabetes (Notley et al., 2021) may
experience decreased heat tolerance.
Obesity has also been identified as a risk
factor for exertional heat illness in the
military (e.g., Bedno et al., 2014; Nelson
et al., 2018b; Alele et al., 2020). Gardner
et al. (1996) reported increasing risk of
exertional heat illness among male
Marine Corps recruits as BMI increased.
Additionally, a smaller body mass to
surface area ratio can reduce capacity
for heat loss since surface area is
relatively smaller in relationship to
mass (Bar-Or et al., 1969; Kenny et al.,
2016). Differences in tissue properties
between adipose (fat) tissue and other
body tissues may indicate that a higher
body fat mass can lead to greater rises
in core temperature for a given amount
of heat storage in the body (Kenny et al.,
2016).
Beyond chronic health conditions,
prior episodes of significant heat-related
illness and recent or concurrent acute
illness or infection may also affect an
individual’s response to heat stress and
increase the risk of heat-related illness
(e.g., Carter et al., 2007; Nelson et al.,
2018a; Nelson et al., 2018b; Alele et al.,
2020). Reviews of research and case
studies of heat-related illness indicate
that acute illnesses that may affect risk
of heat-related illness include upper
respiratory infections and
gastrointestinal infections (Casa et al.,
2012; Alele et al., 2020). However,
statistical evidence is limited (Alele et
al., 2020). Leon and Kenefick (2012)
discuss results from a study of four
marine recruits who presented with
exertional heat illness and who also had
an acute illness separate from heatrelated illness. The recruits’ blood tests
showed elevated levels of immunerelated substances which Leon and
Kenefick identify as being substances
that are both mediators of viral infection
symptoms and substances associated
with exertional heat illness. Leon and
Kenefick interpret this observation,
along with evidence from a study on
rats that showed that bacteria exposure
exacerbated inflammation and organ
dysfunction due to heat stress, to
suggest that pre-existing inflammatory
states, such as those that occur with
acute viral illness, compromise the
ability to thermoregulate appropriately
(Carter et al., 2007; Leon and Kenefick,
2012) (see also Bouchama and Knochel,
2002). Several studies in military
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70727
populations also show that a prior heat
illness may increase risk of a future
episode of heat illness (Nelson et al.,
2018b; Alele et al., 2020). Assessments
of heat and epigenetics (the study of
how the environment and behavior
affects genes) suggest that the complex
physiological responses to heat impact
genetic mechanisms that could play a
role in increasing susceptibility to
future heat illness following an episode
of heat illness (Sonna et al., 2004;
Murray et al., 2022).
Certain medications can also affect
thermoregulation and risk of heatrelated illness. Medications that may
decrease thermoregulatory capability
include medications that treat
cardiovascular diseases, diabetes,
neuropsychiatric diseases, neurological
diseases, and cancer (Wee et al., 2023).
Some of these medications affect
thermoregulation by directly affecting
the region of the brain that controls
thermoregulation or through other
central nervous system effects (e.g.,
antipsychotics, dopaminergics, opioids,
amphetamines) (Cuddy, 2004;
Stollberger et al., 2009; Musselman and
Saely, 2013; Gessel and Lin, 2020; Wee
et al., 2023). Other medications affect
thermoregulation through effects on
heat dissipation that occur due to
changes in sweat response and/or blood
flow to the skin (e.g., anticholinergics,
antihypertensives, antiplatelets, some
antidepressants and antihistamines,
aspirin) (see, e.g., Freund et al., 1987;
Cuddy, 2004; Stollberger et al., 2009;
Wee et al., 2023; CDC, 2024b). There are
also medications that may affect ability
to perceive heat and exertion (e.g.,
dopaminergics) (Wee et al., 2023). Some
medications can affect electrolyte
balances (e.g., diuretics, beta-blockers,
calcium channel blockers, and antacids)
(CDC, 2024b). When accompanied by
dehydration, some medications also
pose a toxicity risk (e.g., apixaban,
lithium, carbamazepine) (CDC, 2024b).
Finally, some medications can affect
fluid volume, kidney function,
hydration status, thirst perception, or
cardiac output (e.g., diuretics, ACE
inhibitors, some anti-diabetics, betablockers, non-steroidal antiinflammatories (NSAIDs), tricyclic
antidepressants, laxatives, and
antihistamines) (Stollberger et al., 2009;
Wee et al., 2023; CDC, 2024b). The
NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended
Standard for Occupational Exposure to
Heat and Hot Environments (table 4–2),
the Department of the Army’s Technical
Bulletin 507 (table 4–2), and CDC’s Heat
and Medications—Guidance for
Clinicians contain additional
information about classes of
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70728
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
medications and the proposed
mechanisms for how they affect
thermoregulation (NIOSH, 2016;
Department of the Army, 2022; CDC,
2024b).
Medications that can affect how
individuals respond to heat are used by
a significant portion of the U.S.
population. Survey data from the
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey from 2015–2016
showed that 60% of adults aged 40–79
used a prescription medication within
the last thirty days and approximately
22% of adults in that same age range
took five or more prescription
medications (Hales et al., 2019). Many
of the medications reported by survey
respondents are medications that can
affect an individual’s response to heat
(e.g., commonly used blood pressure
and diabetes medications).
Amphetamines (whether prescription
or illicit), methamphetamines, and
cocaine can also affect thermoregulation
and increase risk of heat-related illness
(NIOSH, 2016; Department of the Army,
2022). These substances can affect the
central nervous system’s
thermoregulatory functions, stimulate
heat generation, and reduce heat
dissipation through vasoconstriction
(Cuddy, 2004). The synergy between the
hyperthermia induced by these
substances, physical activity, and heat
exposure can increase risk of heatrelated illness (Kiyatkin and Sharma,
2009). Analyses of occupational heatrelated fatalities find amphetamines and
methamphetamines to be an important
risk factor (Tustin et al., 2018a, Karasick
et al., 2020; Lin et al., 2023). In Lin et
al.’s 2023 review of heat-related
hospitalizations and fatalities
documented through NIOSH Fatalities
in Oil and Gas Database (2014–2019)
and OSHA’s Severe Injury Report
Database (2015–2021), 50% of identified
fatalities occurred in workers that had
tested positive for amphetamines or
methamphetamines after they died.
However, small sample sizes, sampling
strategies, and incomplete data have so
far limited the ability of studies to fully
characterize the association between
these substances and risk of heat-related
illness or fatality. Poor data quality or
limited data has also limited current
studies from concluding if and when
amphetamine-like substances are from
prescription or non-prescription use.
Alcohol and caffeine use may also
affect risk of heat-related illness through
effects on hydration status and heat
tolerance (NIOSH, 2016; Tustin, 2018;
Department of the Army, 2022). There
have been cases of fatalities due to
occupational heat exposure in
individuals with a history of ‘‘alcohol
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
abuse or high-risk drinking’’ (Tustin et
al., 2018a, p. e385). Both alcohol and
caffeine may affect how someone
responds to heat stress due to their
ability to cause loss of fluids and
subsequently dehydration, and alcohol
also affects central nervous system
function (NIOSH, 2016). In the case of
caffeine, it appears that moderate
consumption associated with normally
caffeinated beverages (e.g., one cup of
coffee, tea, soda) may not interfere with
thermoregulation in a way that
negatively affects response to heat stress
(NIOSH, 2016; Kazman et al., 2020;
Department of the Army, 2022).
However, heavily caffeinated beverages,
such as energy drinks, have been linked
to negative health outcomes (Costantino
et al., 2023) and could potentially
exacerbate heat stress through diuretic
(salt and water loss) mechanisms and
cardiovascular strain (NIOSH, 2016).
Overall, there is a lack of robust data
that quantify the specific amounts of
alcohol or caffeine that are problematic
for heat stress response. However,
experts generally advise against
drinking alcohol or caffeinated
beverages before or during work or
exercise in the heat (NIOSH, 2016;
Department of the Army, 2022; CDC,
2022).
III. Summary
The evidence presented in this
section demonstrates that there are
numerous factors that can affect risk of
heat-related illness (e.g., genetics, age,
body mass, some chronic conditions,
prescription medications and drugs).
Because prevalence data show that a
majority of working-age adults live with
or experience at least one risk factor,
these factors should be considered an
important component of understanding
how individuals can be at increased risk
for heat-related illness. OSHA
acknowledges, however, that for most of
the described risk factors, the evidence
is not robust enough to determine the
full picture of how the factor impacts
risk of heat-related illness or to establish
the degree to which the risk factor
contributes to overall risk of developing
heat-related illness. There is also a lack
of evidence evaluating the way in which
multiple risk factors combine to affect
risk of heat-related health outcomes.
P. Heat-Related Injuries
I. Introduction
In addition to heat-related illnesses,
heat exposure can lead to a range of
occupational heat-related injuries. A
heat-related injury means an injury,
such as a fall or cut, that is linked to
heat exposure. A heat-related injury
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
may occur as a result of a heat-related
illness, such as a fracture following heat
syncope. The association between heat
exposure and heat-related injury among
workers has been well documented over
the last decade (Tawatsupa et al., 2013;
Xiang et al., 2014b; Adam-Poupart et al.,
2015; Spector et al., 2016; McInnes et
al., 2017; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender,
2021; Dally et al., 2020; Park et al., 2021;
Negrusa et al., 2024). In particular,
analyses of workers’ compensation
claim data has demonstrated the
increased risk of occupational traumatic
injury with increasing heat exposure
(Xiang et al., 2014b; Adam-Poupart et
al., 2015; Spector et al., 2016; McInnes
et al., 2017; Calkins et al., 2019;
Dillender, 2021; Park et al., 2021;
Negrusa et al., 2024). These types of
heat-related injuries can cause
hospitalizations, extended time out of
work, and reduced productivity. In
some instances, a heat-related injury
may be fatal, like in the event of
accidents such as a slip, trip, or fall. In
1972, NIOSH identified occupational
heat exposure as contributing to
workplace injuries, and discussed how
accidents and injuries were outcomes
that could be prevented by a heat stress
standard (NIOSH, 1972). Specifically,
NIOSH highlighted how reduced
physical and psychological
performance, fatigue, accuracy of
response, psychomotor performance,
sweaty palms, and impaired vision may
result in a workplace heat-related
injury.
Since multiple types of injuries can be
heat-related (e.g., strain, fracture,
crushing) and the mechanisms
underlying those injuries vary (e.g.,
impaired speed and reaction time,
impaired vision, impaired dexterity),
the identification and classification of
heat-related injuries varies on a case-bycase basis. Although there are no ICD or
OIICS codes specific to diagnosing heatrelated injuries, medical professionals
and occupational health professionals
can combine a heat-related illness code
with other injury related codes to
indicate an injury is heat-related. An
injury specifically attributed to heat
would be expected to be assigned both
a heat-related OIICS or ICD code and an
injury OIICS or ICD code. Numerous
researchers have used ICD and OIICS
code to conduct studies on heat-related
injuries (Dillender, 2021; GarzonVillalba et al., 2016; Morabito et al.,
2006; Spector et al., 2016).
This section first presents the
epidemiological evidence of increasing
occupational injuries during periods of
hotter temperatures, followed by a
discussion of mechanisms that can lead
to heat-related injuries.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
II. Occupational Heat-Related Injuries
A multitude of studies have identified
an association between heat exposure
and occupational injury in the U.S.
(Knapik et al., 2002; Fogleman et al.,
2005; Garzon-Villalba et al., 2016;
Spector et al., 2016; Calkins et al., 2019;
Dillender, 2021; Park et al., 2021;
Negrusa et al., 2024). These analyses
primarily rely on workers’
compensation claim data and
meteorological data and are often casecrossover or observational time-series in
design.
In two studies of outdoor agricultural
workers (Spector et al., 2016) and
outdoor construction workers (Calkins
et al., 2019) in Washington State,
traumatic injury claims were
significantly associated with heat
exposure. Among outdoor agricultural
workers (n=12,213 claims), Spector et
al. (2016) found a statistically
significant increased risk of traumatic
injuries at a daily maximum humidex
(the apparent, or ‘‘feels like,’’
temperature calculated from air
temperature and dew point, similar to
heat index) above 25 °C (77 °F). Among
outdoor construction workers (n=63,720
claims), Calkins et al. (2019) found an
almost linear statistically significant
association between traumatic injury
risk and humidex. Both studies reported
that injuries most commonly resulted
from falls or bodily reaction and
exertion, which may include sudden
occurrences of strains, sprains,
fractures, or loss of balance, among
others (Spector et al., 2016; Calkins et
al., 2019).
Using workers’ compensation claim
data from Texas, Dillender (2021) found
that hotter temperatures resulted in
larger percent increases in traumatic
injuries among two similar sets of injury
types, ‘‘open wounds, crushing injuries,
and factures’’ and ‘‘sprains, strains,
bruises, and muscle issues.’’ Park et al.
(2021) examined over 11 million
workers’ compensation records in
California and estimated that
approximately 20,000 additional
injuries per year between 2001 and 2018
were related to hotter temperatures. In
comparison to a day with temperatures
in the 60s °F, the risk of occupational
heat-related injury increased by 5–7%
(p<0.05) and 10–15% (p<0.05) on days
with high temperatures between 85–
90 °F and above 100 °F, respectively
(Park et al., 2021).
In these case-crossover studies, cases
serve as their own controls, allowing for
variables such as age, sex, race, and
ethnicity, as well as other known and
unknown time-invariant confounders to
be controlled. However, there are still
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
some limitations to these studies, such
as the potential for time-varying
confounders (e.g., air pollutants like
ozone and sleep duration influenced by
nighttime temperatures).
Studies conducted among workers
outside the U.S. have also reported a
relationship between working in the
heat and increased risk of injuries
(Morabito et al., 2006; Tawatsupa et al.,
2013; Adam-Poupart et al., 2015;
McInnes et al., 2017; Martinez-Solanas
et al., 2018). Analyses from Dally et al.
(2020), found an increase in injury risk
with increasing average daily mean
WBGT above 30 °C (86 °F) among
sugarcane harvesters in Guatemala;
although this result was not statistically
significant, this may have been due to
small sample and event size.
III. Mechanisms
Heat exposure can impair workers’
psychomotor and mental performance,
which can interfere with routine
occupational tasks. Consequently, the
risk of work-related injuries, including
slips, trips, and falls, as well as cuts and
other traumatic injuries, is exacerbated
when job tasks are performed in hot
environments. As summarized in the
prior health effects sections of this
preamble, heat can impair a variety of
physiological systems and produce a
range of symptoms. Changes in the
cardiorespiratory, locomotor, and
nervous systems due to heat exposure
can induce various bodily responses
such as fatigue, which may lead to
injury (Ross et al., 2016). Changes from
elevated skin and core body
temperatures, which may result in
increased sweating and dehydration,
can cause decrements in physical,
visuomotor, psychomotor, and cognitive
performance (Grandjean and Grandjean,
2007; Lieberman, 2007). Even
experiencing a high level of heat
sensation may contribute to discomfort
and distress, causing distraction and
other behavioral changes that can result
in accidents and injuries (Simmons et
al., 2008). An explanation of how heat
exposure can impair psychomotor and
mental performance, and consequently
lead to occupational heat-related
injuries is provided below.
A. Impaired Psychomotor Performance
Heat exposure can impair
psychomotor function (i.e., the
connection between mental and muscle
functions) which may cause heat-related
injuries. Impaired psychomotor function
from heat exposure can take multiple
forms, including impaired movement,
strength, or coordination (fatigue);
impaired postural stability and balance;
and impaired accuracy, speed, and
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70729
reaction time. Each of these
impairments to psychomotor
performance are discussed in turn
below.
I. Impaired Movement, Strength, or
Coordination (Fatigue)
Heat exposure can hamper
psychomotor performance by impairing
workers’ movement, strength, or
coordination and causing fatigue.
Fatigue has been described as having a
lack of energy or a feeling of weariness
or tiredness (NIOSH, 2023b). Effects
from heat strain on the cardiorespiratory
and locomotor systems can cause both
central and peripheral fatigue due to
increased heat storage at the brain and
muscle levels, along with other
physiological mechanisms (Ross et al.,
2016). As an individual’s metabolic rate
increases in hot environments, blood pH
level may become more acidic and
cause muscle fatigue from increased
muscle glycogen degradation, lactate
accumulation, and elevated
carbohydrate metabolism (Varghese et
al., 2018). These changes have been
shown to compromise performance.
Numerous studies demonstrate the
relationship between heat exposure and
fatigue. In a cross-sectional survey of
256 occupational health and safety
professionals in Australia, fatigue was
the most reported incident in workers
during higher temperatures (Varghese et
al., 2020). Among two groups of 55 steel
plant workers who completed a
questionnaire assessing fatigue, the
group of workers exposed to hotter
environments (30–33.2 °C (80–91.76 °F)
WBGT) were significantly more likely to
report symptoms of fatigue in
comparison to workers in cooler
environments (25.4–28.7 °C (77.7–
83.6 °F) WBGT) (Chen et al., 2003). This
study highlights how fatigue symptoms
increase with rising heat exposure levels
(Chen et al., 2003).
Moreover, in a review of 55 studies on
workplace heat exposure, core
temperature elevation and dehydration
have been shown to have numerous
negative behavioral effects including
fatigue, lethargy, and impaired
coordination, which may lead to injury
(Xiang et al., 2014a). These 55 articles
included ecological (22%), crosssectional (64%), and cohort (5%)
studies, as well as epidemiological
experiments (9%). From one study
included in the review, 42% of
construction workers surveyed reported
it was ‘‘easy to get fatigued’’ while
working in the summer (Inaba and
Mirbod, 2007). In another review of heat
stress risks in the construction industry,
Rowlinson et al. (2014) also discussed
the association of high temperatures and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70730
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
level of fatigue, which has been
considered one of the critical factors
leading to construction accidents
(Garrett and Teizer, 2009; Chan, 2011).
In a case study of 15 workers who
experienced fatigue-related accidents,
fatigue was shown to trigger other safety
risks, such as not following proper
safety procedures or becoming
distracted, which can induce injury
(Chan, 2011).
II. Impaired Postural Stability and
Balance
Heat exposure has also been shown to
impair postural stability and balance as
increases in metabolic heat can impact
workers’ gross motor capacity (i.e., the
ability to move the body with
appropriate sequencing and timing to
perform bodily movements with refined
control), including postural balance. As
individuals become dehydrated, they
may experience negative neuromuscular
effects. Distefano et al. (2013)
demonstrated the detrimental impact of
dehydration during task performance in
hot conditions, where subjects
experienced decreased neuromuscular
control as characterized by poorer
postural stability. The authors found
that neuromuscular control was
impaired while participants were
hypohydrated (defined as
uncompensated loss of body water) and
hyperthermic. Additionally, when an
individual is experiencing highintensity exertion in hot environments
and is already dehydrated, this can
result in further dilution of blood
sodium. When blood sodium is diluted,
water may be forced from the
extracellular compartment into the
intracellular compartment, which could
lead to pulmonary congestion, brain
swelling, and heat stroke (Distefano et
al., 2013). At this stage, neurons begin
degenerating in the cerebellum and
cerebral cortex, and this process
coupled with the rise in body
temperature, impairs central nervous
system functionality (Sawka et al., 2011;
Nybo, 2007; Distefano et al., 2013).
Research also indicates that
performing exertional activities in a hot
environment may impair balance. To
better understand lower extremity
biomechanics, Distefano et al. (2013)
used an assessment tool to measure
gross movement errors, such as medial
knee displacement, hip or knee rotation,
and limited sagittal plane (front to back)
motion. The authors found that after
performing the exercise protocol,
participants demonstrated poorer
movement technique when they were
hypohydrated in a hot environment
compared with when they were
hypohydrated in a temperate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
environment or in a hot environment
but euhydrated (state of optimal total
body water content) (Distefano et al.,
2013). These findings suggest that
working in hot temperatures while
dehydrated may increase risk for injury
due to impaired balance (Distefano et
al., 2013).
III. Impaired Performance in Accuracy,
Speed, and Reaction Time
The compromising effects of heat
strain on psychomotor function have
long been established, but the level of
performance deterioration is dependent
on the severity of heat strain and the
complexity of the task (Taylor et al.,
2016; Hancock, 1986; Ramsey, 1995;
Pilcher et al., 2002; Hancock and
Vasmatzidis, 2003). Some research has
found that when high skin and core
temperatures increase cardiovascular
strain, heat exposure results in faster
reaction times where individuals
respond more quickly, but less
accurately when in the heat (Simmons
et al., 2008). Other research, such as
Mazloumi et al. (2014), found that heat
stress conditions impair selective
attention (the ability to select and focus
on a particular task while
simultaneously ignoring other stimuli)
and reaction time. In their study of 70
workers in Iran, where half of the
workers experienced heat stress and half
worked in air-conditioning, the authors
found impaired psychomotor function
among the exposed workers indicated
through an increase in the duration of
a task and response time as well as an
increase in the number of errors
(Mazloumi et al., 2014).
Additional studies examine the
impacts of high skin and core
temperatures on psychomotor function
contributing to more mistakes (Allan
and Gibson, 1979; Gibson and Allan,
1979; Gibson et al., 1980). In one study
of foundry workers, response time,
reaction time, and number of errors
were reported to be adversely affected
when workers were exposed to WBGTs
of 31–35 °C (87.8–95 °F) compared to
unexposed workers in a WBGT of 17 °C
(62.6 °F) (Mazlomi et al., 2017). A metaanalysis review of 23 studies supports
these conclusions, finding that under
hot conditions, performance on
mathematical-related tasks and reaction
time tasks can be negatively impacted at
32.2 °C (89.9 °F) with a roughly 15%
average decrement in performance
(Pilcher et al., 2002).
Pyschomotor performance is an
important factor when considering job
tasks that require precision and
concentration to prevent injuries. In a
study observing steel plant workers, it
was found that electrical arc melting
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
workers who were exposed to hotter
environments (30–33.2 °C WBGT)
experienced a significant decrease in
their attention span and slower response
time compared to the continuous cast
workers, who worked in cooler
environments (25.4–28.7 °C WBGT)
(Chen et al., 2003). A decline in
psychomotor function could also
negatively affect speed of response,
reasoning ability, associative learning,
mental alertness, and visual perception,
which has been reported as a key cause
of fatal accidents (Rowlinson et al.,
2014).
B. Impaired Mental Performance
The effects of heat exposure on
mental performance can also play a
significant role in increasing workplace
accidents and injuries and compromise
workplace safety. Heat exposure can
result in impaired cognition or cognitive
performance; impaired visual motor
tracking; and impaired decision-making
or judgment, which can lead to unsafe
behaviors (like the removal of required
PPE). Each of these are discussed in turn
below.
I. Impaired Cognition or Cognitive
Performance
Declines in cognitive function from
heat are correlated with an elevated risk
of injury. Evidence indicates a
statistically significant increase in
unsafe behaviors above 23 °C WBGT and
an increased risk of accidents (Ramsey
et al., 1983). When an individual
experiences hyperthermia, even if it is
mild and only occurring for a short
period, the central nervous system is
vulnerable to damage (Hancock and
Vasmatzidis, 2003). This can acutely
affect memory, attention, and ability to
process information (Walter and
Carraretto, 2016). When hyperthermia
triggers cerebral damage, these cerebral
injuries can be characterized into three
broad areas. The first area includes
cellular effects (where cells are damaged
as temperatures continue to rise and
normal cell function is disrupted and
cell replication is no longer possible).
The second area includes local effects
(like inflammatory changes and vascular
damage), and the third area includes
systemic changes (like changes in
cerebral blood flow (Walter and
Carraretto, 2016). These negative effects
are typically seen when core body
temperatures reach 40 °C (104 °F),
although some changes can begin at
temperatures of 38 °C (100.4 °F) (Walter
and Carraretto, 2016). These
physiological changes also negatively
impact cognitive performance.
Heat exposure has been shown to
affect cognitive performance
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
differentially, based on type of cognitive
task (Yeoman et al., 2022). The more
complex a task, especially if it requires
motor accuracy, the more likely an
individual’s cognitive ability to perform
the task will decline because of heat
stress (Hancock and Vasmatzidis, 2003).
Some research indicates a decrease in
cognitive performance for tasks
requiring more perceptual motor skills
will be observed in the 30–33 °C (80–
91.4 °F) range, well before the
physiological system reaches its
tolerance limit (Ramsey and Kwon,
1992; Hancock and Vasmatzidis, 2003;
Piil et al., 2017). Ramsey and Kwon
(1992) have summarized over 150
studies looking at task exposure time
and task type and found statistically
significant performance decrements at
the 30–33 °C (80–91.4 °F) range. The
decrements at this range occurred
regardless of duration of exposure (from
short exposures under 30 minutes and
longer exposures up to 8 hours) (Ramsey
and Kwon, 1992). Furthermore, in a case
study of nine male volunteers, results
indicate that highly motivated subjects
were strongly affected by heat load
within the first two hours of exposure,
and that these subjects’ performance
was significantly impaired when
assigned complex tasks requiring a
significant amount of reasoning and
judgment (Epstein et al., 1980). The
authors found that performance began to
decrease when workers were exposed to
temperatures above 27 °C (80.6 °F).
Moreover, in a review of fifteen
laboratory experiments assessing the
effects of high ambient temperature on
mental performance, one study found
that mental performance declines were
statistically significant at exposure
durations of four consecutive hours in
87 °F (30.55 °C) temperatures (Wing,
1965). Similarly, in a study of the effects
of hot-humid and hot-dry environments
on mental functioning, 25 participants
were exposed to a variety of
temperatures in humid and dry
conditions, while performing physical
exercises with bouts of rest, to assess
mental alertness, associative learning,
reasoning ability and dual-performance
efficiency (Sharma et al., 1983). The
authors found that all the psychological
functions tested were adversely affected
under heat stress, and that a significant
drop in various psychological functions
was seen at temperatures of 32.2 °C
(89.9 °F) and 33.3 °C (91.9 °F) in hothumid and hot-dry conditions,
respectively. Moreover, the authors
suggest that, for heat-acclimatized
subjects who continuously work for four
hours, that the temperature should not
exceed 31.1 °C (87.9 °F) in hot and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
humid conditions, and 32.2 °C (89.9 °F)
for workers in hot desert conditions
(Sharma et al., 1983).
II. Impaired Visual-Motor Tracking
Hyperthermia and dehydration, a
common symptom of heat exposure,
have been found to impair visual-motor
tracking (i.e., the eyes’ ability to focus
on and follow an object), increasing the
risk of workplace injury. In a review of
studies on hydration and cognition, the
authors indicate that a 2% or more loss
of body weight due to dehydration from
heat and exercise can result in
significant reduction in visual-motor
tracking (Lieberman, 2007). In an
experimental study assessing
performance in complex motor tasks in
hyperthermic humans (Piil et al., 2017),
the authors found that visual-motor
tracking performance was reduced
following exercise-induced
hyperthermia. Participants were
exposed to hot (40 °C (104 °F)) and
control (20 °C (68 °F)) conditions. At
baseline, and after exercise, participants
completed simple and complex motor
tasks, which included visual tracking
assessment. The authors concluded that
visual-motor tracking is impaired by
hyperthermia, and especially so when
multiple tasks are combined (Piil et al.,
2017).
III. Impaired Decision-Making or
Judgment
Heat exposure has been found to
affect decision-making or judgment
amongst workers, increasing the risk of
injury. In a review of ecological, crosssectional, and cohort studies, as well as
epidemiological experiments, Xiang, et
al. indicate that core temperature
elevation and dehydration impair
judgment and concentration (Xiang, et
al., 2014a). In a study analyzing over
17,000 observations of unsafe behavioral
acts (e.g. mishandling tools, equipment,
or materials) in two industrial facilities
with varying temperature conditions,
authors found that unsafe behavioral
acts decreased within the zone of
preferred temperature (approximately
17 °C (62.6 °F) to 23 °C (73.4 °F), WBGT)
and increased outside of this zone
(when the temperature was equal to or
less than 17 °C WBGT or equal to or
greater than 23 °C WBGT) (Ramsey et al.,
1983). This study indicates that the risk
of unsafe behavioral acts may increase
when the temperature increases.
C. Other Factors Contributing to HeatRelated Injury
In addition to psychomotor and
mental impairments that can result from
heat exposure, other mechanisms may
also contribute to heat-related injuries.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70731
The purpose of this section is to
summarize some additional factors that
may exacerbate the risk of workplace
heat-related injuries and to provide
information to better inform workers
and employers about those hazards.
PPE is another factor that plays a role
in increasing susceptibility to a heatrelated injury given that some PPE
insolates the body and reduces
evaporative cooling capacity. For
instance, research among firefighters
finds that a self-contained breathing
apparatus can lead to heat buildup and
can impact postural stability and
balance (Hur et al., 2015; Hur et al.,
2013; Games et al., 2020; Mani et al.,
2013; Ross, 2016). Other examples of
PPE that may result in heat stress, and
therefore increase the risk of heatrelated injuries, include reflective vests
that are made of water impermeable
material that block effective heat
dissipation and safety helmets with no
ventilation that can raise the
temperature inside the helmet. In one
case, the air temperature inside a
worker’s helmet (57 °C (134.6 °F)) was
measured to be over 20 °C hotter than
the environmental temperature (33 °C
(91.4 °F)) they were working in
(Rowlinson et al., 2014). The authors
found that workers will often remove
helmets in these situations to alleviate
heat stress, exposing them to other
workplace hazards (e.g., falling objects)
(Rowlinson et al., 2014). Other research
by Karthick et al. (2023) found that in
hot weather conditions, physical health
challenges, specifically major accidents
at the job site, minor injuries, physical
fatigue, excessive sweating, and
dermatological problems were found to
be significant based on a workers’
clothing comfort. The authors
highlighted how PPE can make workers
feel uncomfortable, and when combined
with extremely hot weather, it creates
fatigue which may increase the number
of workplace injuries and accidents
(Karthick et al., 2023).
There is also evidence indicating heat
exposure can contribute to impaired
vision, which may lead to workplace
injuries. For example, fogged safety
glasses or sweat in eyes due to heat
exposure can reduce workers’ visibility,
creating additional hazards and
increasing risk of injury (NIOSH, 2016).
Individual case studies also report
issues with protective eyewear in hot
temperatures, noting the uncomfortable
feeling of the eyewear under heat and in
sunlight as well as difficulty seeing
through the glasses (Choudhry and
Fang, 2008). In a survey conducted
among occupational health and safety
professionals in Australia, one of the
most frequently cited causes of heat-
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70732
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
related injuries was from ‘‘impaired
vision due to fogged safety glasses
(39%)’’ (Varghese et al., 2020). Injuries
resulting from impaired vision may
include manual handling
(musculoskeletal injuries), joint/
ligament injuries, hand injuries, wounds
or lacerations, burns, head or neck
injuries, motor vehicle accidents, eye
injuries, or fractures (Varghese et al.,
2020).
When exposed to heat, workers may
also experience impaired dexterity (or
fine motor skills) leading to workplace
injuries. For example, sweaty palms and
hands due to heat exposure can reduce
workers’ ability to handle tools or other
work-related materials, increasing the
risk of injury. Occupational health and
safety professionals have reported losing
control of tools as one of the most
common causes for heat-related injuries
(Varghese et al., 2020). Researchers have
also found sweaty palms to increase the
risk of workplace injuries (Shulte et al.,
2016).
IV. Summary
The scientific and mechanistic data
and association studies on heat-related
injuries summarized in this section
demonstrate that heat-related injuries
are a recognized health effect of
occupational heat exposure. While the
types of heat-related injuries can be
broad, the scientific community
recognizes that heat exposure can
diminish the body’s senses through
various mechanisms like impaired
psychomotor performance (e.g., fatigue,
impaired balance, or impaired
dexterity), and impaired mental
performance (e.g., impaired cognition or
vision) which can result in various
types of injuries. The best available
evidence demonstrates that heat-related
injuries can have serious adverse effects
on worker safety and health.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Q. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests information and
comments on the following question
and requests that stakeholders provide
any relevant data, information, or
additional studies (or citations)
supporting their view, and explain the
reasoning for including such studies:
• Has OSHA adequately identified
and documented the studies and other
information relevant to its conclusions
regarding heat-related health effects,
and are there additional studies OSHA
should consider?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
V. Risk Assessment
A. Risk Assessment
I. Introduction
In this risk assessment, OSHA relied
on surveillance data of occupational
heat-related fatalities and non-fatal
injuries and illnesses reported by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Additionally, OSHA relied on annual
incidence estimates derived from State
workers’ compensation systems and
hospital discharge datasets. These
estimates were calculated and reported
in a variety of sources, such as reports
from State health departments, as well
as the peer-reviewed scientific
literature. OSHA has preliminarily
concluded that inclusion criteria for
HRIs in these data sources (days away
from work, workers’ compensation
claim, emergency department visit, or
inpatient hospitalization) demonstrate
that the HRIs are a material impairment
of health, thus making these data
sources relevant to OSHA’s
determination of significant risk.
OSHA has previously relied on such
injury, illness, and death data to
demonstrate the extent of risk (see, e.g.,
Fall Protection, 81 FR 82494 (2016);
Working Conditions in Shipyards, 76 FR
24576 (2011); Permit-Required Confined
Spaces, 58 FR 4462, 4465 (1993)
(finding significant risk based on
available accident data showing that
confined space hazards had caused
deaths and injuries); Hazard
Communication, 48 FR 53280, 53284–
85, 53321 (1983) (finding significant risk
of harm from inadequate chemical
hazard communication based on BLS
chemical source injury and illness
data)).
Estimating annual incidence among
heat-exposed workers (i.e., the number
of annual work-related HRIs divided by
the number of heat-exposed workers)
requires being able to accurately
estimate the number of exposed workers
and using that number in the
denominator. Unfortunately, there is no
published estimate for the number of
U.S. workers exposed to hazardous heat
on the job and the majority of the
incidence estimates that OSHA
identified used a denominator that
would include both exposed and
unexposed workers. This use of a larger
denominator has the effect of diluting
the resulting annual incidence
estimates. For instance, BLS estimates
and reports annual incidence of injuries
and illnesses involving days away from
work that were the result of ‘‘exposure
to environmental heat,’’ but in their
calculation, BLS captures the broader
U.S. workforce in the denominator,
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
which includes a large number of
unexposed workers (e.g., office workers
in climate-controlled buildings).
Some of the annual incidence
estimates that OSHA identified, such as
those based on workers’ compensation
claims in California and Washington
State, were stratified by sector, industry,
or occupation. OSHA considers these
incidence estimates to be helpful in
getting to a more accurate estimate of
risk among heat-exposed workers,
specifically the sectors, industries, and
occupations where exposure to
hazardous heat on the job is more
common. Furthermore, OSHA identified
incidence estimates from cohort data in
which the entire cohort was presumed
to be exposed to hazardous heat on the
job. These estimates are much higher
than the estimates based on surveillance
data. One potential reason for this
difference is that the denominator used
in the cohort studies contains much less
unexposed worker-time.
In the following sections (V.A.II., and
V.A.III.), OSHA has summarized the
best available incidence data that the
agency identified. Given the limitations
with these data, OSHA relied on this
incidence data as a range of possible
incidence estimates with the
assumption that many of these estimates
represent a lower bound and that the
true incidence is likely higher.
II. Reported Annual Incidence of
Nonfatal Occupational Heat-Related
Injuries and Illnesses
A. BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries
and Illnesses
The BLS Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) is the
primary nationwide source of
surveillance data for nonfatal
occupational injuries and illnesses. The
scope includes both private and public
(State and local government) sector
employees, but excludes the selfemployed, workers on farms with 10 or
fewer employees, private household
workers, volunteers, and Federal
Government employees. The data are
derived from a two-stage sampling
process, during which a sample of
employers are surveyed and report to
BLS the number of injuries and illnesses
occurring at their workplace. To reduce
the reporting burden on employers, BLS
only requires detailed case information
on a sample of the injuries and illnesses
that occurred at each establishment.
BLS uses these survey responses to
estimate the counts and incidence for
nonfatal injuries and illnesses across all
workplaces. In estimating annual
incidence, BLS uses a denominator of
full-time equivalent (FTE) workers,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
which is based on 2,000 hours worked
per year (i.e., 40 hours per week over 50
weeks). Relevant Occupational Injury
and Illness Classification System
(OIICS) v2.01 event and nature codes for
this proposed standard include
‘‘Exposure to environmental heat’’
(event code-531) and ‘‘Effects of heat
and light’’ (nature codes beginning in
172–). Codes beginning with 172–
include heat stroke and heat exhaustion
(among other outcomes) but exclude
sunburn and loss of consciousness
without reference to heat. For more
information about OIICS codes
generally, see Section IV., Health
Effects.
Between 2011 and 2020, there were
an estimated 33,890 work-related
injuries and illnesses that involved days
away from work that were coded with
event code 531, for an annual average of
3,389 such injuries and illnesses during
this period (BLS 2023b). In 2023, BLS
reported biennial rather than annual
estimates for work-related injuries and
illnesses that involved days away from
work (as well as for the first time
reporting an estimate of injuries and
illnesses involving job restriction or job
transfer). The biennial estimate for
2021–2022 for heat-related cases
meeting either of these criteria was
6,550 (5,560 cases involved days away
from work; 990 cases involved job
transfer or restriction) (BLS 2023g). The
estimated annual heat-related injury and
illness incidence (for cases involving
days away from work) calculated by
BLS for all workers covered by SOII
from 2011–2020 varied by year but
ranged from 2.0/100,000 workers to 4.0/
100,000 workers. The average estimated
annual incidence for the entire time
period was 3.0/100,000 workers.
However, as stated above, OSHA
considers these incidence estimates to
be underestimated for heat-exposed
workers because BLS calculates the
incidence rate for the entire U.S.
workforce covered by SOII. Therefore,
they are including workers who are not
exposed to hazardous heat. In
subsectors and industries where OSHA
expects a greater proportion of workers
to be exposed to hazardous heat, the
incidence rate estimates are much
higher. For instance, according to
unpublished data from BLS SOII for the
period 2011–2020, the crop production
subsector (NAICS code 111) had an
annual average incidence of 14.2/
100,000 workers, and the specialty trade
contractors subsector (NAICS code 238)
had an annual average of 9.3/100,000
workers. This was also true of
subsectors with primarily indoor
workers where OSHA expects a greater
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
proportion of those workers to be
exposed to hazardous heat, including
the primary metal manufacturing
subsector (NAICS code 331), which had
an annual average incidence of 13.1/
100,000 workers for the period 2011–
2020.
B. Workers’ Compensation Claims
Workers’ compensation claims are an
alternative way to quantify occupational
injuries and illnesses, particularly those
that involve outpatient medical
treatment, inpatient hospitalization,
intensive care, and/or lost workdays.
OSHA identified five papers and a
report from Wisconsin that have
evaluated State workers’ compensation
data and calculated statewide incidence
for heat-related injuries and illnesses.
I. Washington State
The earliest of these, a paper by
Bonauto et al., in 2007, evaluated
workers’ compensation claims
submitted to and accepted by the
Washington State Fund between 1995
and 2005 (Bonauto et al., 2007). The
State Fund is the sole provider of
workers’ compensation insurance to
Washington employers unless they are
self-insured or fall under an alternative
system (e.g., Federal employees) and it
covers approximately two-thirds of the
State’s workers. Certain workers are
exempt from mandatory coverage, such
as self-employed and household
workers. The authors identified heatrelated cases using the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI)
Z16.2 codes 2 submitted in the claims by
workers or their physicians, the ICD–9
codes submitted on bills from
healthcare providers and hospitals, and
a physician review of cases that
included relevant Z16.2 or ICD–9 codes.
The researchers used all ICD–9 codes
beginning in 992 (‘‘Effects of heat and
light,’’ specifically 992.0–992.9) and the
ANSI Z16.2 type code 151 (‘‘Contact
with general heat—atmosphere or
environment’’). ICD–9 codes were not
available for claims from the selfinsured, so the authors restricted the
analysis to State Fund claims only. They
also excluded claims in which the
employer’s physical location was
outside of Washington (n=12).
Over the 11-year study period, 480
accepted claims met the authors’
inclusion criteria after physician review,
in which they identified and removed
2 The American National Standards Institute, or
ANSI, created a standard for occupational health
and safety metrics in 1962 (revised in 1969) referred
to as ANSI Z16. The first version of OIICS was
based on the ANSI coding scheme. ANSI revised
the Z16 standard in 1995 and adopted the OIICS
scheme in that revision.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70733
cases where the recorded illness had
been miscoded, contained incorrect
data, or represented a burn. Most of the
480 claims (n=442; 92.1%) were
medical-only claims, meaning the State
Fund only paid for the medical bills and
did not compensate the worker
otherwise (e.g., wage replacement,
disability benefits). The claims included
the employer’s NAICS code, which the
authors used to stratify cases by
industry sectors and industries.
Employers covered under the
Washington State Fund are required to
report hours worked by their employees
every quarter (i.e., three-month
increments), which the authors used to
estimate denominators for rates
assuming 2,000 work hours is 1 FTE.
This means the authors could calculate
rates for certain portions of the year
rather than the whole year without
needing to divide by the total number of
annual workers (i.e., they could adjust
for hours worked only during the
specified portion). The employment
reporting by quarter also allowed for the
authors to estimate claim rates for the
third quarter only (July, August, and
September), which corresponded to the
time of year with the ‘‘greatest level of
exposure to elevated environmental
temperatures’’ (Bonauto et al., 2007, p.
5).
The authors reported an average
annual claim rate (which can be thought
of similarly to an injury or illness
incidence rate) of 3.1 claims/100,000
FTE for the overall workforce covered
by the State Fund during the study
period, with annual rates ranging from
1.9 to 5.1/100,000 FTE. They reported a
corresponding average third-quarter
claim rate of 8.6 claims/100,000 FTE for
the overall workforce covered by the
State Fund during the study period. In
their paper, Bonauto et al. report annual
and third-quarter rates for all sectors
and industries that had more than five
claims during the study period. The
sectors (2-digit NAICS) with the highest
annual average claim rates were:
1. Construction (12.1/100,000 FTE),
2. Public administration (12.0/100,000
FTE),
3. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting (5.2/100,000 FTE),
4. Administrative and support and
waste management and remediation
services (3.9/100,000 FTE), and
5. Transportation and warehousing
(3.5/100,000 FTE).
The corresponding average thirdquarter claim rates for these sectors
were more than double the annual
averages: 33.8/100,000 FTE, 31.2/
100,000 FTE, 12.6/100,000 FTE, 9.9/
100,000 FTE, and 10.6/100,000 FTE,
respectively. This pattern was also true
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70734
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
for some sectors with a majority of
indoor claims. For example,
Manufacturing (3.0/100,000 FTE vs. 7.6/
100,000 FTE) and Accommodation and
food services (1.7/100,000 FTE vs. 5.1/
100,000 FTE).
The industries (6-digit NAICS) with
the highest annual average claim rates
were:
1. Fire protection (80.8/100,000 FTE),
2. Roofing construction (59.0/100,000
FTE),
3. Highway, street and bridge
construction (44.8/100,000 FTE),
4. Site preparation construction (35.9/
100,000 FTE) (tie), and
5. Poured concrete foundation and
structural construction (35.9/100,000
FTE) (tie).
Similar to the pattern observed among
sectors, the corresponding third-quarter
claim rates for the top 5 industries were
more than double the annual averages,
except for fire protection—158.8/
100,000 FTE, 161.2/100,000, 105.6/
100,000 FTE, 106.5/100,000 FTE, and
102.6/100,000 FTE, respectively. This
was also true for restaurants: limited
service restaurants (2.4/100,000 FTE vs.
6.0/100,000 FTE) and full service
restaurants (1.6/100,000 FTE vs. 5.3/
100,000 FTE). These industries have few
to no outdoor claims, indicating that
even some industries that involve
primarily indoor work are at higher risk
in the summer months.
A follow-up paper to Bonauto et al.,
2007, published in 2014, examined
heat-related illnesses among workers in
Washington State in certain agriculture
and forestry subsectors between 1995
and 2009 (Spector et al., 2014). The
State changed their injury and illness
codes from ANSI to OIICS in July 2005,
so for this paper, the researchers used a
combination of ANSI (prior to July
2005), OIICS (beginning in July 2005),
and ICD–9 codes to identify potential
heat-related claims and then reviewed
each claim to ensure it was heat-related.
These authors used additional ICD–9
codes that were not included in the
2007 paper, specifically: prickly heat
(705.1), hyperosmolality and/or
hypernatremia (276.0), volume
depletion (276.5 and 276.50),
dehydration (276.51), hypovolemia
(276.52), and acute renal failure (584
and 584.9). The authors identified 84
accepted claims meeting their eligibility
criteria, the majority of which (n=76;
90%) were medical only claims. Of the
84 claims, 61 (73%) met the diagnostic
code criteria used in the 2007 paper
(ICD–9 codes beginning in 992). The
average annual claim rate for the
agriculture and forestry subsectors the
authors examined over the 15-year
period was 7.0/100,000 FTE and the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
average third-quarter (July–September)
claim rate was 15.7/100,000 FTE. The
majority of claims (61%) were among
crop production and support workers
(NAICS 111 or 1151).
A second follow-up paper to Bonauto
et al., 2007, was published in 2020 and
included all Washington State Fundcovered workers over a more recent 12year period, 2006 to 2017 (Hesketh et
al., 2020). The authors used similar
methods, except for different screening
criteria for ascertaining cases prior to
investigators reviewing each case. To
identify potential heat-related claims,
they used OIICS v1.01 event/exposure
code 321, OIICS nature code 072*,
OIICS source codes 9362 and 9392
(Sun), and the ICD–9 codes used in
Spector et al., 2014. (Note that these
OIICS codes are v1.01 OIICS, which was
the coding scheme used from 1992–
2010. BLS updated the coding scheme
in 2010, which first applied to 2011
data.) The State adopted ICD–10 coding
in October 2015, so the following ICD–
10 codes were used for claims after that
date: E86* (Volume depletion), T67*
(Effects of heat and light), T73.2*
(Exhaustion due to exposure), W92*
(Exposure to excessive heat of manmade origin), X30* (Exposure to
excessive natural heat), and Z57.6
(Occupational exposure to extreme
temperature). The researchers excluded
claims in which service date for
treatment of dehydration or kidney
failure was not within one day of the
illness date or claims in which
dehydration or kidney failure were the
only identifiers flagged, as they noted
that these cases often did not represent
heat-related illnesses.
The authors reported a total of 918
confirmed heat-related claims, of which
654 (71%) were accepted claims. Of the
accepted claims, 595 (91%) were
medical-only claims. Using only
accepted claims, they estimated an
average annual claim rate of 3.2 claims/
100,000 FTE for the overall workforce
covered by the State Fund during the
study period (Communication with
David Bonauto and June Spector, June
2024). Similar to Bonauto et al., 2007,
the authors reported claim rates for all
sectors and industries with more than
11 claims. The sectors (2-digit NAICS)
with the highest annual average
accepted claim rates were:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting (13.0/100,000 FTE),
2. Construction (10.8/100,000 FTE),
3. Public administration (10.3/100,000
FTE),
4. Administrative and support and
waste management and remediation
services (4.6/100,000 FTE), and
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5. Transportation and Warehousing
(3.8/100,000 FTE).
The average third-quarter (July–
September) claim rates for some sectors
were more than 10 times greater than
the average annual rates. These thirdquarter claim rates were also much
higher than those calculated for 1995–
2005 in Bonauto et al., 2007. The sectors
with the highest average third-quarter
accepted claim rates were:
1. Public administration (131.3/
100,000 FTE),
2. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting (102.6/100,000 FTE),
3. Construction (70.0/100,000 FTE),
4. Administrative and support and
waste management and remediation
services (61.5/100,000 FTE), and
5. Wholesale trade (44.9/100,000
FTE).
The industries (6-digit NAICS) with
the highest annual average accepted
claims rates were:
1. Farm labor contractors and crew
leaders (77.3/100,000 FTE),
2. Fire protection (60.0/100,000 FTE),
3. Structural steel and precast
concrete contractors (54.2/100,000 FTE),
4. Poured concrete foundation and
structure contractors (31.6/100,000
FTE), and
5. Roofing contractors (29.0/100,000
FTE).
The ratio between third-quarter rates
and annual rates for all industries
reported in table 3 of the paper ranged
from 2.5–13.7, with the highest average
third-quarter accepted claim rates in the
following industries:
1. Farm labor contractors and crew
leaders (600.9/100,000 FTE),
2. Fire protection (394.6/100,000
FTE),
3. Administration of conservation
programs (282.7/100,000 FTE),
4. Site preparation contractors (232.1/
100,000 FTE), and
5. Poured concrete foundation and
structure contractors (172.3/100,000
FTE).
II. California
A group of researchers conducted a
similar analysis for the State of
California, using data from the
California Workers’ Compensation
Information System (WCIS) between
2000 and 2017 (Heinzerling et al., 2020).
Virtually all California employees are
required to be covered by workers’
compensation; voluntary, noncompensated workers, owners, and
workers covered under separate
programs are excluded. The WCIS
contains all accepted and rejected
workers’ compensation claims in the
State since 2000 that required medical
treatment beyond first aid or more than
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
one day of lost work time. The
investigators identified heat-related
claims in the system using WCISspecific nature of injury and cause of
injury codes (e.g., ‘‘temperature
extremes’’), heat-related illness
keywords (e.g., ‘‘heat stroke’’), and
certain ICD–9 (992.0–992.9 and E900.0–
E900.9) and ICD–10 (T67.0–T67.9, X30,
and W92) codes. They also manually
reviewed all claims that met only the
ICD code identification criteria to
ensure the claims were heat-related, as
some of the codes they used to identify
claims were not specific to heat-related
illness or injury. In WCIS, the
employer’s industry is coded using
NAICS codes classified by the claims
adjusters. The authors converted the
NAICS codes into the appropriate 2002
census industry codes using the NIOSH
Industry and Occupation Computerized
Coding System (NIOCCS). This was
necessary to obtain the corresponding
employment denominator estimates
from the NIOSH Employed Labor Force
Tool, which relies on data from the
Current Population Survey (CPS), a
Census Bureau survey conducted for
BLS. The CPS data provide estimates of
all employed and non-institutionalized
civilian workers over the age of 15. To
account for changes in coding schemes
implemented in 2002, the investigators
extrapolated 2002–2017 data to estimate
denominators for 2000 and 2001.
The authors excluded claims for
workers below 16 years of age (n=104
claims) and institutionalized workers
(n=455 claims), as these workers are
excluded from CPS data. They reported
a final estimate of 15,996 claims
meeting their inclusion criteria,
corresponding to an overall annual
claims rate of 6.0/100,000 workers.
Industry and occupation codes were
available for 86% and 74% of the
included claims, respectively. The
authors reported claim rates for all
sectors, but the sectors with the highest
annual claim rates were:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting (38.6/100,000 workers; 95% CI:
26.9, 40.4),
2. Public administration (35.3/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 34.3, 36.3),
3. Mining (21.3/100,000 workers; 95%
CI: 17.6, 25.7),
4. Utilities (11.4/100,000 workers;
95% CI: 10.1, 12.8), and
5. Administrative and support and
waste management (8.8/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 8.3, 9.3).
The major occupational groups with
the highest annual claim rates were:
1. Protective services (56.7/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 54.9, 58.7),
2. Farming, fishing, and forestry (35.9/
100,000 workers; 95% CI: 34.1, 37.9),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
3. Material moving (12.3/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 11.5, 13.1),
4. Construction and extraction (8.9/
100,000 workers; 95% CI: 8.4, 9.4), and
5. Building and grounds cleaning and
maintenance (6.0/100,000 workers; 95%
CI: 5.6, 6.5).
III. Texas
Another study examined workers’
compensation claims in an unnamed,
mid-sized Texas city before and after an
intervention among a cohort of 604
municipal workers and calculated the
incidence of HRI claims from 2009 to
2017 (McCarthy et al., 2019). The
municipal departments included in the
study were picked because the job
descriptions for workers within each
included work in hot environments
with moderate and heavy physical
activity. These departments were Streets
and Traffic, Parks and Recreation,
Utilities, and Solid Waste. After
removing worker-time contributed by
administrative personnel who were not
exposed to heat on the job, the
remaining worker-time represented 329
FTEs per year. Prior to the intervention
in 2011, the heat-exposed workers
experienced 17 total HRIs between 2009
and 2010. The authors reported an
average annual rate of HRIs among the
heat-exposed workers during this time
of 25.5/1,000 FTEs (McCarthy et al.,
2019, Figure 2). These estimates are
much higher than other incidence
estimates reported in this section,
possibly because the denominator is
solely comprised of heat-exposed
workers. This explanation is supported
by evidence of higher incidences
reported in other cohort studies (e.g.,
approximately 3 HRIs/1,000 National
Guard troops involved in flood relief
activities between July 5 and August 18,
1993, calculated from data in Dellinger
et al., 1996). The results of the voluntary
intervention are discussed in Section
V.C., Risk Reduction.
IV. Wisconsin
Finally, a report issued by the
Wisconsin Occupational Health and
Safety Surveillance Program in 2024
summarized an analysis of heat-related
workers’ compensation claims in the
State from 2010–2022 (Fall et al., 2024).
The authors analyzed lost work time
claims (under Wisconsin workers’
compensation, there must be more than
three days of lost work time to be
compensable) reported by both
insurance carriers and self-insured
employers and reported rates by
industry sector and industry subsector
(rather than overall workforce rates).
These do not include medical-only
claims, which were the majority of HRI
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70735
claims reported in the Washington State
Fund database. The authors reported
cumulative claim rates only. To convert
cumulative rates to annual average rates,
OSHA divided the reported rates by 13
(the number of years’ worth of data
reported). The sectors with the highest
annual average claim rates were:
1. Administrative and Support and
Waste Management and Remediation
Services (2.9/100,000 FTE),
2. Public Administration (2.8/100,000
FTE),
3. Wholesale Trade (1.9/100,000 FTE),
4. Construction (1.4/100,000 FTE),
and
5. Transportation and Warehousing
(1.1/100,000 FTE).
The major occupational groups with
the highest annual average claims rates
were:
1. Protective Service (4.1/100,000
FTE),
2. Transportation and Material
Moving (2.6/100,000 FTE),
3. Production (1.6/100,000 FTE),
4. Construction and Extraction (1.5/
100,000 FTE), and
5. Building and Grounds Cleaning and
Maintenance (1.5/100,000 FTE).
Similarly, the minor occupational
groups with the highest annual average
claims rates were:
1. Fire Fighting and Prevention (14.7/
100,000 FTE),
2. Material Moving Workers (3.3/
100,000 FTE),
3. Metal and Plastic Workers (2.8/
100,000 FTE),
4. Motor Vehicle Operations (2.2/
100,000 FTE), and
5. Assemblers and Fabricators (2.2/
100,000 FTE).
C. Emergency Department (ED) Visits
and Inpatient Hospitalizations
Another way to quantify occupational
injury and illnesses requiring medical
treatment is to use data reported directly
by hospitals to public health
departments or national databases, such
as the National Electronic Injury
Surveillance System (NEISS). Data in
NEISS are estimated from a nationally
representative probability sample of
hospitals across the country, which
report data for every injury-related ED
visit. A paper from 2010 analyzed
NEISS data for heat-related emergency
department visits from 2001–2004
(Sanchez et al., 2010). The authors
reported an annual average of 8,376
work-related ED visits for nonfatal heat
injuries and illnesses. OSHA used
annual average employment estimates
from NIOSH’s Employed Labor Force
query system for 2001–2004 (both total
workers and FTEs) to estimate a
nationwide annual average rate of 6.1
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70736
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
visits/100,000 workers and 6.3 visits/
100,000 FTEs from this study. More
recent studies estimating the incidence
of work-related ED visits and/or
hospitalizations for HRIs within
individual or multiple States are
discussed below.
I. Southeast U.S.
A group of public health researchers
from nine States in the Southeast
(Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia) used
hospital discharge data reported directly
to State health departments to
characterize rates of heat-related
inpatient hospitalization and ED visits
among workers from 2007—2011
(Harduar Morano et al., 2015). The
researchers used ICD–9 codes to identify
heat-related cases, specifically 992.0–
992.9, E900.0, E900.1, and E900.9. To
assess work-relatedness, they
determined whether the expected payer
was workers’ compensation or if a workrelated external cause of injury code
(sometimes referred to as E-codes) was
noted by the physician (e.g., E000.0
Civilian activity done for income). They
restricted cases only to those where the
patient was at least 16 years old but
included both State residents and nonresidents in reported case counts. To
calculate rates, the investigators used
CPS data for estimating denominators,
which were age-adjusted using direct
standardization and population weights
for the entire U.S. Non-residents were
not included in the rate calculations.
The authors noted that hospital
discharge data weren’t available for
every year in every State and that the
missing data were primarily for
discharges following ED visits.
Across the five-year study period, the
authors identified 8,315 occupational
heat-related ED visits (7,664 of these
among residents, or 92%), which
corresponded to an overall age-adjusted
rate of 6.5 visits/100,000 workers (95%
confidence interval, CI = 6.4, 6.7). While
they reported rates for each State (e.g.,
4.8 visits/100,000 workers in Florida
and 17.3 visits/100,000 workers in
Louisiana), they cautioned against
directly comparing between States given
differences in the data collection
methods, data availability, and use of
work-related variables. They identified
1,051 occupational heat-related
inpatient hospitalizations (930 among
residents, or 88%), which corresponded
to an overall age-adjusted rate of 0.61
hospitalizations/100,000 workers (95%
CI = 0.58, 0.66). The average length of
stay for State residents was 2.7 days,
which was comparable to non-residents
(2.4 days).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
II. Florida
The Florida Department of Health
published a similar analysis in 2011
using the same methods for the State of
Florida for the years 2005—2009
(Florida DOH, 2011). They identified
2,198 occupational heat-related
hospitalizations and ED visits, which
corresponded to an average overall ageadjusted annual rate of 3.7 cases/
100,000 workers (95% CI = 1.9, 5.5) and
a crude rate (no age adjustment) of 5.1/
100,000 workers (Communication with
Laurel Harduar Morano, October 2023).
The majority of these (89.4%) were ED
visits. They identified 3 fatalities in this
subset, which they noted corresponds to
a case fatality rate of 1.4 fatalities/1,000
cases. They reported a third-quarter
(July, August, and September) rate of 3.2
cases/100,000 workers using a
denominator of total number of workers,
whereas using a denominator of FTEs
instead produced a third-quarter rate of
13.0 cases/100,000 FTE
(Communication with Laurel Harduar
Morano, October 2023). A 2016 study
conducted a more in-depth analysis of
the statewide Florida hospitalization
data and included data for three
additional years (2010, 2011, and 2012)
(Harduar Morano et al., 2016). The
authors restricted the data to cases
occurring in May-October of each year
and identified a total of 2,979 workrelated ED visits and 415 work-related
hospitalizations between 2005–2012.
Using total number of workers in the
denominator (calculated from monthly
CPS data), these corresponded to
average annual age-adjusted rates of 8.5
ED visits/100,000 workers and 1.1
hospitalizations/100,000 workers.
III. Louisiana
In March 2023, the Louisiana
Department of Health published a report
on heat-related illnesses in the State
using ED and hospitalization data from
2010–2020 (Louisiana DOH 2023). The
authors used workers’ compensation as
payer and work-related ICD codes to
determine which cases were among
workers. They reported an annual
average of 320 work-related ED visits
and 20 work-related hospitalizations for
heat-related illness during this period.
Using State employment data from CPS,
the authors calculated an overall ageadjusted rate of 15.1 work-related ED
visits/100,000 workers and 0.9 workrelated hospitalizations/100,000
workers. In 2024, the Department of
Health released a syndromic
surveillance report on ED visits for HRIs
between April 1 and October 31, 2023
(Louisiana DOH 2024). They identified
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1,412 ED visits for HRIs among workers
during this time period.
IV. Multiple States
Since 2013 over 20 States have
reported rates of heat-related ED visits
among workers to the Council of State
and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE),
comprising the organization’s
Occupational Health Indicator #24 (see
www.cste.org/page/ohindicatorstable).
These data are compiled by the State
health departments using workers’
compensation as primary payer and
external cause of injury codes to
determine work-relatedness. Rates are
calculated using CPS estimates of total
employed persons by State. While
multiple States report their annual rates
to CSTE, the organization cautions
against directly comparing these rates
between States because ‘‘workers’
compensation eligibility criteria and
availability of data from workers’
compensation programs varies among
states, prohibiting state-level data from
being directly compared to other states
or with national estimates.’’
Additionally, given that these data are
not available for every State, they
cannot be combined to produce an
accurate national rate. The Statereported rates are currently available for
2013–2019. During this period, the
annual rates for heat-related ED visits
ranged from 0.1 to 18.7 ED visits per
100,000 workers.
V. Maricopa County, Arizona
Arizona is not one of the States to
share their ED visit data to CSTE, but
the most populated county in the
State—Maricopa County—has published
a Heat Morbidity Report in which they
provide case counts for heat-related
hospitalization discharges, including a
breakdown of the ‘‘preceding activity
type’’ (determined by ICD activity Ecodes) (Maricopa County Public Health
Department, n.d.). Using the case counts
reported under ‘‘occupational’’ activity
type and yearly estimates of the average
annual employment for Maricopa
County provided by the BLS Quarterly
Census of Employment and Wages,
there was an average annual
hospitalization rate among workers of
4.1 cases/100,000 workers (range: 3.1–
6.4/100,000) between 2010–2017.
Primary payer of workers’ compensation
was not used to determine workrelatedness, which means some
occupational cases not involving Ecodes may have been missed. Given that
for the majority of cases (77%–83% per
year), the preceding activity was marked
as ‘‘unknown’’, it’s likely that some
number of these were occupational in
nature and just not listed as such. This
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
is supported by the fact that an
‘‘Industrial Site’’ was the place of injury
for, on average, 8% of cases, which may
also be an underestimate. It should be
noted that the authors only used the
following ICD–9/ICD–10 activity Ecodes to determine work-relatedness:
E011/Y93.C Activities involving
computer technology and electronic
devices; E012/Y93.D Activities
involving arts and handcrafts; and E016/
Y93.H Activities involving exterior
property and land maintenance,
building and construction. To OSHA’s
knowledge, the authors did not use any
other external cause of injury codes,
such as E000.0 Civilian activity done for
income, but it is not clear from the
report if these E-codes were not
available or were just not used.
D. Indirect Injuries
As discussed in Section IV.P., Heat
Related Injuries, one area of research
has used the natural fluctuations in
temperatures to conduct quasiexperimental studies examining the
relationship between heat and workers’
compensation claims for traumatic
injuries (e.g., Spector et al., 2016;
Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender 2021;
Park et al., 2021). The findings of these
papers suggest that there may be many
workers’ compensation claims that are
heat-related but not coded as such. For
instance, Park, Pankratz, and Behrer
(2021) estimated that approximately
20,000 injuries per year in California
between 2001–2018 resulted from hotter
temperatures (relative to ‘‘optimal’’
temperature). For comparison, for a
similar time period (2000–2017),
Heinzerling et al. (2020) only identified
an average of 889 HRI workers’
compensation claims per year in
California (a 22-fold difference),
suggesting that relying on workers’
compensation claims coded as HRIs
alone does not capture the higher
incidence of injuries of other kinds
where heat may have played a role. A
research report from the Workers
Compensation Research Institute
expanded this type of analysis to 24
States, using a convenience sample of
workers’ compensation claims from
May–October 2016–2021 (Negrusa et al.,
2024). They found that the number of
injuries increased 3.2–6.1% when the
daily maximum temperature was 75 °F
or higher relative to a day with a daily
maximum temperature of 65–70 °F. This
relationship was even more pronounced
for the construction industry.
E. Worker Self-Reports
Another source of incidence data is
surveys of workers exposed to heat.
Multiple papers describe the results of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
surveys of outdoor workers, typically
agricultural workers, who are asked
about heat-related symptoms
experienced over a week-long period
while working in the summer months
(Fleischer et al., 2013; Kearney et al.,
2016; Mutic et al., 2018). Commonly
reported symptoms in these studies
include heavy sweating (38–66% of
surveyed workers), headache (44–58%),
muscle cramps (30–36%), dizziness
(14–32%), weakness or fatigue (18%),
and nausea or vomiting (9–17%).
Notably, in two of these studies,
multiple workers reported fainting on
the job. A study in southern Georgia
found that 4% of 405 farmworkers
experienced fainting within the
previous week, during which the heat
index ranged from 100–108 °F (Fleischer
et al., 2013). Another study involved
asking 281 farmworkers in North
Carolina if they had ever worked in
‘‘extreme heat.’’ Of those answering
‘‘yes’’, 3% reported having ever fainted
on the job (Mirabelli et al., 2010). When
asked about symptoms over a single
workday, a separate study found that
25% of workers reported cramps, 22%
headache, 10% dizziness, and 3%
nausea (Smith et al., 2021).
F. Summary of Reported Annual
Incidence of Nonfatal Occupational
Heat-Related Injuries and Illnesses
OSHA identified multiple sources
that have reported annual incidence
estimates for nonfatal HRIs among
workers. These studies and reports
generally reported heat-related
incidence across an entire workforce
(either National or State), using the total
workforce as the denominator. This
would understate the risk to workers
who are actually exposed to heat on the
job since the denominator includes a
large percentage of workers who are not
exposed to heat (e.g., office workers).
Evidence in support of this claim comes
from studies showing higher incidence
of HRI when populations are stratified
by sector, industry, or occupation, as
well as those reporting incidence that
occurred only during the third quarter
(July, August, and September). For
instance, in Heinzerling et al., 2020, the
authors report an overall annual
incidence of 6.0/100,000 workers
whereas they report an annual
incidence of 38.6/100,000 workers for
workers in the agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting sector (a greater
than 6-fold difference). OSHA considers
these stratified estimates to be more
accurate estimates of the ‘‘true’’
incidence of HRIs among heat-exposed
workers.
A summary of the annual incidence
estimates for nonfatal occupational HRIs
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70737
discussed above can be found in table
V–1. In the same table, OSHA calculated
the number of non-fatal HRIs that would
be expected over a working lifetime
(assuming a working lifetime is 45 years
long) based on those annual incidence
estimates (i.e., the annual incidence
multiplied by 45). These estimates
represent the total number of HRIs that
may be expected to occur in a cohort of
100,000 workers all of whom enter the
workforce at the same time and all of
whom work for 45 years. Estimates of
HRI risk over a working lifetime based
on annual incidence among entire
working populations (National or State)
range from 90–180/100,000 for HRIs
requiring days away from work, 140–
270/100,000 for HRIs leading to a
workers’ compensation claim, and 4.5–
842/100,000 for HRIs leading to
emergency department visits or
inpatient hospitalizations. Like
incidence estimates, these values
understate the risk to workers who are
actually exposed to heat on the job since
the denominator includes a large
percentage of workers who are not
exposed to heat (e.g., office workers).
However, when using incidence
estimates specific to individual sectors,
industries, or occupations, the HRI
estimates over a working lifetime are
much higher, ranging from 49.5–
114,750/100,000 for HRIs leading to a
workers’ compensation claim.
III. Reported Occupational Heat-Related
Fatalities
The BLS Census of Fatal Occupational
Injuries (CFOI), established in 1992, is
the primary source of surveillance data
on work-related fatalities, including
fatalities due to environmental heat
exposure, for the United States. The
fatality data in CFOI come from diverse
data sources to identify, verify, and
describe work-related fatalities. In each
case, at least two sources (e.g., death
certificates, workers’ compensation
reports, media reports, and government
agency administrative reports) and an
average of four are used to validate that
the fatality was work-related and to
verify the event or exposure leading to
death and the nature of injury or illness
in each case, which are then classified
with OIICS codes. Heat-related fatalities
can be identified with an event code
(‘‘Exposure to environmental heat’’)
and/or a nature code (‘‘Effects of heat
and light’’).
According to BLS’s CFOI,
occupational heat exposure killed 1,042
U.S. workers between 1992 and 2022
(BLS, 2024c). Between 2011 and 2022,
BLS reports 479 worker deaths, an
average of 40 fatalities per year during
that time. During the latest three years
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70738
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
for which BLS reports data (2020–2022),
there was an average of 45 work-related
deaths due to exposure to
environmental heat per year. Multiple
sources have relied on BLS surveillance
data to estimate annual incidence rates
of occupational heat-related fatalities.
Gubernot et al. (2015) calculated
overall fatality rates and fatality rates by
industry sector using BLS CFOI data
from 2000–2010 (Gubernot et al., 2015).
The authors focused on the three
industry sectors with the highest rates
in preliminary analyses: Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (NAICS
code 11); Construction (NAICS code 23);
and Administrative and Support and
Waste Management and Remediation
Services (NAICS code 56). All other
industry sectors were combined for
comparison as a referent group. The
authors used nationwide worker
population data from the CPS to
estimate fatality rates. The CPS data
provide estimates of all employed and
non-institutionalized civilian workers
over the age of 15.
The authors identified 339
occupational heat-related deaths from
2000–2010, after excluding volunteers
and military personnel. They reported
an average annual heat-related fatality
rate of 0.022 fatalities per 100,000
workers for the overall workforce.
For the three industry sectors
preliminarily identified as having the
highest rates, the authors reported the
following average annual fatality rates:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
hunting (0.306 fatalities per 100,000
workers),
2. Construction (0.113 fatalities per
100,000 workers), and
3. Administrative and Support and
Waste Management and Remediation
Services (0.056 fatalities per 100,000
workers).
For all other industry sectors
combined, the average annual fatality
rate was substantially smaller (0.009
fatalities per 100,000 workers). The
agriculture and construction sectors
combined accounted for 58% of the
fatalities during the study period
(n=207).
A CDC Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report (MMWR) from 2008
reported by Luginbuhl et al. investigated
heat-related fatalities among all
workers—and agriculture workers in
particular—using BLS CFOI data from
1992–2006 (Luginbuhl et al., 2008).
During the study period, the authors
identified 423 deaths related to
environmental heat in CFOI using the
OIICS v1.01 event/exposure code 321
(Exposure to environmental heat) and
nature code 072* (Effects of heat and
light). Similar to the approach taken by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Gubernot et al., the authors calculated
rates using CPS estimates of the average
annual worker population for
denominators.
For the overall workforce, the authors
calculated an average annual incidence
of 0.02 fatalities/100,000 workers,
which is similar to the estimate reported
by Gubernot et al. for 2000–2010 (0.022/
100,000). Of the 423 fatalities identified,
102 (24%) occurred in the agriculture,
forestry, fishing, and hunting sector
(average annual fatality rate of 0.16/
100,000 workers) and 68 occurred
among workers in crop production or
support activities for crop production
(annual fatality rate of 0.39/100,000
workers). The rates for crop workers in
North Carolina, Florida, and California
were 2.36/100,000 workers, 0.74/
100,000 workers, and 0.49/100,000
workers, respectively. These findings
were later included in a peer-reviewed
article (Jackson and Rosenberg 2010).
The editorial note accompanying this
MMWR report mentioned, among other
limitations, that CPS estimates used for
denominators likely underestimate the
number of crop workers—because of the
potential lack of stable residences
among these workers and the seasonal
trends in employment—which would
lead to an overestimate of risk for these
workers. This limitation would
presumably apply to any rate estimates
calculated with CPS data for this
specific population. To OSHA’s
knowledge, this is the only reported
limitation in the included articles that
would suggest a potential
overestimation of incidence.
A third paper analyzed BLS CFOI
heat-related fatality data for the
construction sector, estimating fatality
rates for various occupations within the
sector using Standard Occupational
Classification codes (Dong et al., 2019).
Using the OIICS v2.01 nature code 172*
(Effects of heat and light) to determine
heat-relatedness and CPS estimates for
sector-wide and occupation-specific
denominators, the authors identified 82
heat-related construction deaths
between 2011–2016 and estimated an
average annual fatality rate for the entire
sector (0.15 fatalities/100,000 workers)
as well as for specific occupations. The
occupations with the highest fatality
rates included cement masons (1.62/
100,000); roofers (1.04/100,000); helpers
(1.03/100,000); brick masons (0.50/
100,000); and laborers (0.29/100,000).
Finally, a paper from 2005 by
Mirabelli and Richardson identified
heat-related fatalities using medical
examiner records from North Carolina
for the period from 1977 to 2001,
including 15 years of data before the
creation of CFOI (Mirabelli and
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Richardson 2005). They determined that
heat was a primary or underlying cause
of death based on ICD–9 codes. The
researchers used the decedents’ location
and activities reported in the records to
determine work-relatedness, and they
excluded cases in which the decedent
was <10 years old or those which
involved manufactured sources of heat.
The authors identified 40
occupational heat-related deaths. They
classified 18 of these as farm workers
and reported an annual fatality rate
among these farm workers of 1.52
fatalities/100,000 workers. They
reported 10 cases having occurred at a
construction site but did not report a
fatality rate for this group of workers.
The average annual fatality rate for the
entire State working population was
0.05 fatalities/100,000 workers.
As none of the identified papers
reported fatality rates for the overall
workforce for years beyond 2010, OSHA
used the heat-related fatality counts
reported by BLS for 2011–2022 (479
worker deaths) and employment
estimates for the same years from CPS
to calculate fatality rates for these years.
For the denominator, OSHA used the
total number of workers and average
hours worked to estimate total FTEs per
year. The average annual fatality rate
during this period was 0.029 deaths/
100,000 FTEs.
A. Summary of Reported Occupational
Heat-Related Fatalities
OSHA identified multiple studies that
calculated and reported annual
incidence estimates for heat-related
fatalities among workers using data from
BLS CFOI or medical examiner records.
These studies reported heat-related
fatality rates across an entire workforce
(either National or State), using the total
workforce as the denominator. As
mentioned above, this would understate
the risk to workers who are actually
exposed to heat on the job since the
denominator includes a large percentage
of workers who are not exposed to heat
(e.g., office workers). Evidence in
support of this claim comes from
studies showing higher fatality rates
when populations are stratified by
sector, industry, or occupation. For
instance, in Gubernot et al., 2015, the
authors report an overall annual fatality
rate of 0.022/100,000 workers whereas
they report an annual fatality rate of
0.306/100,000 workers for workers in
the agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting sector (a 14-fold difference).
OSHA considers these stratified
estimates to be more accurate estimates
of the ‘‘true’’ incidence of heat-related
fatalities among heat-exposed workers.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70739
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE V–1—ESTIMATED RISK OF EXPERIENCING A HEAT-RELATED INJURY OR ILLNESS ANNUALLY AND OVER A 45-YEAR
WORKING LIFETIME
Population
Average
annual rate
(per 100,000
workers)
Source of data
Expected
number of
nonfatal HRIs
per 100,000
workers over
working
lifetime
Rates Based on Entire Working Populations
U.S., All Workers ...........................................................................
State Working Populations ............................................................
State Working Populations ............................................................
BLS SOII Injuries and Illnesses Involving Days Away from Work
Workers’ Compensation Records .................................................
Emergency Department Visits and/or Inpatient Hospitalization ...
1 2.0–4.0
3 0.1–18.7
90–180
140–270
4.5–842
5.2
13.0
38.6
12.1
10.8
1.4
12
10.3
35.3
2.8
3.9
4.6
8.8
2.9
3.5
3.8
1.1
11.4
21.3
1.9
234
585
1,737
545
486
63.0
540
464
1,589
126
176
207
396
131
158
171
49.5
513
959
85.5
77.3
80.8
60.0
54.2
35.9
31.6
59.0
29.0
44.8
35.9
3,479
3,636
2,700
2,439
1,616
1,422
2,655
1,305
2,016
1,616
56.7
4.1
35.9
12.3
2.6
8.9
1.5
6.0
1.5
1.6
2,550
2,552
185
1,616
554
117
401
67.5
270
67.5
72.0
114,750
14.7
3.3
2.8
2.2
2.2
662
149
126
99.0
99.0
2 3.1–6.0
Rates Based on Sector-Specific Groups (2-digit NAICS)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting .....................................
Construction ..................................................................................
Public Administration .....................................................................
Administrative and support and waste management and remediation services.
Transportation and warehousing ...................................................
Utilities ...........................................................................................
Mining ............................................................................................
Wholesale Trade ...........................................................................
Washington State, 1995–2005 ......................................................
Washington State, 2006–2017 ......................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Washington State, 1995–2005 ......................................................
Washington State, 2006–2017 ......................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Washington State, 1995–2005 ......................................................
Washington State, 2006–2017 ......................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Washington State, 1995–2005 ......................................................
Washington State, 2006–2017 ......................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Washington State, 1995–2005 ......................................................
Washington State, 2006–2017 ......................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Rates Based on Industry-Specific Groups (6-digit NAICS)
Farm labor contractors and crew leaders .....................................
Fire protection ...............................................................................
Structural steel and precast concrete ...........................................
Poured concrete foundation and structural contractors ................
Roofing contractors .......................................................................
Highway, street, and bridge construction ......................................
Site preparation construction ........................................................
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
State,
2006–2017
1995–2005
2006–2017
2006–2017
1995–2005
2006–2017
1995–2005
2006–2017
1995–2005
1995–2005
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
......................................................
Rates Based on Major Occupational Groups
Protective services ........................................................................
Farming, fishing, and forestry .......................................................
Transportation and Material moving .............................................
Construction and extraction ..........................................................
Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance .........................
Production .....................................................................................
Municipal workers in departments governing streets and traffic,
parks and recreation, utilities, and solid waste.
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
California, 2000–2017 ...................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Wisconsin, 2010–2022 ..................................................................
Texas, 2009–2017 ........................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rates Based on Minor Occupational Groups
Fire Fighting and Prevention .........................................................
Material Moving Workers ..............................................................
Metal and Plastic Workers ............................................................
Motor Vehicle Operations ..............................................................
Assemblers and Fabricators .........................................................
Wisconsin,
Wisconsin,
Wisconsin,
Wisconsin,
Wisconsin,
2010–2022
2010–2022
2010–2022
2010–2022
2010–2022
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
1 Ranges
reflect varying annual average estimates between 2011–2020.
reflect values reported in Heinzerling et al., 2020, Bonauto et al., 2007, and Hesketh et al., 2020.
reflect values reported in or derived from Harduar Morano et al., 2015, Florida DOH 2011, Louisiana DOH 2023, Harduar Morano et al., 2016, CSTE, and
Maricopa County Public Health Department.
2 Ranges
3 Ranges
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70740
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
IV. Limitations and Underreporting
Evidence suggests that existing
surveillance data undercount the total
number of heat-related injuries,
illnesses, and fatalities, among workers.
The incident rates presented in the
previous section are likely vast
underestimates both because they use
this surveillance data as the numerator
when calculating incidence rates and
because they overestimate the number
of workers exposed to hot work
environments (i.e., the denominator for
incidence rates). These sources of
uncertainty are described below.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Incidence Estimation
Incidence estimates based on BLS
data are likely to underestimate the true
risk to workers who are exposed to
specific hazards, like heat, in part
because of difficulties in estimating the
population of exposed workers. The
current approach for BLS SOII rate
estimates is to use the population of all
workers in the U.S. for the denominator,
not just those exposed to the hazard of
interest. For instance, the denominators
used for the risk estimates presented
above would include most office
workers who work in climate-controlled
buildings and would therefore not have
occupational exposure to the levels of
heat stress that have been associated
with adverse outcomes. For 2022, BLS
reported 116,435,925 full-time workers
in the U.S. However, OSHA estimates
the proposed standard would cover
approximately 36 million workers,
approximately one-third of the total fulltime workers in the U.S. Therefore,
BLS’s use of a larger denominator likely
underestimates risk because it includes
workers not exposed to hazardous heat
and therefore less likely to experience
an HRI.
The denominators for the annual
incidence estimates presented above
also include worker-time for the entire
year, even though for many workers,
exposure to potentially harmful levels of
heat only occurs during the hottest
months of the year. Including
unexposed worker-time in the
denominator has the effect of diluting
the incidence estimates, meaning
annual incidence estimates do not
accurately represent the risk to workers
when they are actually exposed to
hazardous heat. The risk to workers
whose jobs do expose them to harmful
levels of heat, on the days on which
those exposures occur, would therefore
be expected to be higher than the
estimates published by BLS. In addition,
using total worker populations as a basis
for estimating incidence likely will
underestimate the risk to particularly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
susceptible workers, such as older
workers, workers with pre-existing
conditions, and workers not
acclimatized to the heat.
OSHA believes that studies that
reported illness rates by sector or
occupation provide evidence showing
that the annual average illness rates
reported across the entire workforce
underestimate risk for exposed workers.
For example, the Washington State and
California workers’ compensation
studies found that heat-related illness
rates for sector- or occupation-specific
populations were substantially higher
than the rates for the general working
population in the State (Heinzerling et
al., 2020; Bonauto et al., 2007; Hesketh
et al., 2020). The sectors and
occupations examined included those
where exposure to hot environments
was more likely than for the population
as a whole (e.g., Construction and
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and
Hunting). Additionally, many of the
surveillance papers described above
also reported the month in which the
injury, illness, or fatality occurred and
found that most cases were clustered in
the hotter, summer months (e.g., June,
July, and August). When researchers in
Washington and Florida restricted their
rate estimates to include data only for
the third quarter (July, August, and
September), they found rates that were
several-fold higher than annual average
illness rates over the whole population,
which include many unexposed workerdays.
B. Undercounting of Cases
The general underreporting and
undercounting of occupational injuries
and illnesses has been a topic of
multiple government reports (e.g.,
Ruser, 2008; Miller, 2008; GAO, 2009;
Wiatrowski, 2014). The authors of the
peer-reviewed papers described in
sections V.A.II., and V.A.III., above list
underreporting or misclassification of
cases as a limitation in their analyses
that would have the effect of
underestimating risk.
I. BLS SOII
Two papers from the early 2000s that
linked workers’ compensation records
to BLS SOII data found evidence that
SOII missed a substantial amount of
workers’ compensation claims,
depending on the State analyzed and
the assumptions and methodology used
(Rosenman et al., 2006; Boden and
Ozonoff, 2008). In response to increased
attention around this topic at the time,
BLS funded additional research to
examine the extent of underestimation
in SOII and potential reasons
(Wiatrowski, 2014). One of these studies
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
involved linking multiple data sources
(i.e., not just SOII and workers’
compensation) for cases of amputation
and carpal tunnel syndrome (Joe et al.,
2014). The authors found that the Statebased surveillance systems included 5
times and 10 times more cases than BLS
SOII, respectively.
Another study conducted as part of
this broader effort estimated that
approximately 30% of all workers’
compensation claims in Washington
between 2003–2011 were not captured
in BLS SOII (Wuellner et al., 2016). This
included sectors with higher rates of
heat-related injuries and illnesses, such
as Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and
Hunting (28% of cases uncaptured) and
Construction (28% uncaptured)
(Wuellner et al., 2016, Table III). The
rate of underreporting was particularly
high for large construction firms
(Wuellner et al., 2016, Table IV).
In response to the studies on SOII
undercount, BLS authors have argued
that differences in the inclusion criteria,
scope, and purpose between BLS SOII
and workers’ compensation explain
some of differences in the estimates and
complicate the interpretations of the
linkage-based studies (Ruser, 2008;
Wiatrowski, 2014). SOII estimates
OSHA-recordable injuries and illnesses
each year and provides detailed case
and demographic information (e.g.,
nature of injury) for a specific subset of
the more severe cases (e.g., those
involving days away from work). This
scope (OSHA-recordable injuries and
illnesses) inherently limits the ability
for SOII to be used to estimate all
occupational injuries and illnesses.
Additionally, injuries and illnesses
involving days away from work
represent a limited percentage of the
total injuries and illnesses reported to
BLS. In 2022, these cases were 42% of
total recordable cases, suggesting the
case counts for HRIs in SOII could be
missing up to 58% of all OSHArecordable HRIs (i.e., those not
involving days away from work)
(https://www.bls.gov/iif/latestnumbers.htm).
The injury and illness data that
employers report to BLS come from the
employer’s OSHA Form 300 Log of
Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses and
OSHA Form 301 Injury and Illness
Incident Report, so information on the
quality of the data in these forms is
relevant for understanding limitations of
SOII. Through the Recordkeeping
National Emphasis Program (NEP) from
2009–2012, OSHA found that almost
half (47%) of establishments inspected
by the agency had unrecorded and/or
under-recorded cases, which were more
common at establishments that
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
originally reported low rates (Fagan and
Hodgson, 2017). Several factors
contributed to the under-recording and
unrecording cases. First, in conducting
thousands of interviews, the authors
found that workers do not always report
injuries to their employers because of
fear of retaliation or disciplinary action.
Second, some employers used on-site
medical units, which the authors
explained could contribute to
underreporting (e.g., if these units were
used to provide first aid when
additional medical care, which would
have warranted reporting on OSHA
forms, should have been provided).
Employers rely on workers to report
injuries and illnesses that may
otherwise be unobserved, but workers
have multiple reasons to not do so. In
addition to Fagan and Hodgson 2017,
multiple studies have interviewed or
surveyed workers on this topic. A recent
systematic review of 20 studies found
that 20–74% of workers—which
included cleaning staff, carpenters,
construction workers, and healthcare
workers—did not report injuries or
illnesses to management (Kyung et al.,
2023). Some of the researchers asked
workers about the barriers to reporting,
which included fear, a lack of
knowledge on the reporting process, and
considering the injury to be a part of the
job or not serious.
Finally, employers are disincentivized
from reporting injuries and illnesses on
their OSHA logs. Disincentives for
reporting include workers’
compensation premiums being tied to
injury and illness rates, competition for
contracts involving safety records, and a
perception that reporting will increase
the probability of being inspected by
OSHA (GAO, 2009).
In interviews with employers selected
to respond to SOII, researchers found
that 42% of them were not maintaining
a log (Wuellner and Phipps, 2018). In
the same study, researchers found
evidence to suggest that
misunderstandings about the reporting
requirements would likely lead to
employers underreporting cases
involving days away from work. A
similar study conducted among SOII
respondents in Washington State found
that 12% weren’t maintaining a log and
90% weren’t complying with some
aspect of OSHA’s recordkeeping
requirements (Wuellner and Bonauto,
2014).
While the general underreporting
articles described here are not specific
to heat, Heinzerling et al. 2020
examined rates of heat-related injuries
and illnesses among workers in
California and found that California’s
workers’ compensation database, WCIS,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
had 3–6 times the number of heatrelated cases between 2009–2017 than
the official BLS SOII estimates for
California for each year in that period
(Heinzerling et al., 2020). Part of the
reason for this discrepancy could be the
difference in inclusion criteria between
the two datasets, however, it is still a
useful estimate for contextualizing the
potential magnitude of underreporting
of heat-related cases when using only
SOII. While outside the U.S., a recent
survey of 51 Canadian health and safety
professionals in the mining industry
found that 71% of respondents believed
HRIs were underreported (Tetzlaff et al.,
2024).
II. Workers’ Compensation
While workers’ compensation data
may capture injury and illness cases not
included in BLS SOII, the data are not
available for the entire U.S., as
insurance coverage and reporting
requirements vary across States, and
most States do not have single-payer
systems. Therefore, the majority of
claims data are compiled by various
insurers and not within a single
database. Even when the data are
available for an entire State, it is
generally presumed that not all worker
injuries and illnesses are captured in
these data, in part because of eligibility
criteria and in part because of
underutilization of workers’
compensation for reimbursement of
work-related medical expenses.
Multiple papers have examined the
extent to which and reasons why
workers don’t always use workers’
compensation insurance to pay for
work-related medical expenses and
other reimbursable expenses. Some
reasons workers have reported for not
filing workers’ compensation claims
include fear, a lack of knowledge, ‘‘too
much trouble’’ or effort, and considering
the injury to be a part of the job or not
serious (Kyung et al., 2023; Scherzer et
al., 2005). Using the Washington State
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance
System (BRFSS), a telephone survey,
Fan et al. (2006) found that 52% of the
respondents in 2002 reporting a workrelated injury or illness filed a workers’
compensation claim. Using similar
methodology across 10 States, Bonauto
et al. (2010) found that among
respondents who reported a workrelated injury, there was a wide range in
the proportion who reported having
their treatment paid for by workers’
compensation by State—47% in Texas
to 77% in Kentucky (with a median of
61%). A study from 2013 estimated that
40% of work-related ED visits were paid
for by a source other than workers’
compensation (Groenewold and Baron,
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70741
2013). Worker race, geography, and
having an illness rather than an injury
were all predictors of whether workers’
compensation was the expected payer.
There are a few papers that suggest
this phenomenon is occurring for heatrelated outcomes. Harduar Morano et al.
2015 (described above in Section
V.A.II., Reported Annual Incidence of
Nonfatal Occupational Heat-Related
Injuries and Illnesses) found that across
several southeastern States, workers’
compensation as expected primary
payer alone captured 60% of all
emergency department visits and
inpatient hospitalizations, which varied
by State (50–80% for emergency
department visits and 38–84% for
inpatient hospitalizations) (Harduar
Morano et al., 2015). Similarly, in the
2011 report by the Florida Department
of Health (described above in Section
V.A.II., Reported Annual Incidence of
Nonfatal Occupational Heat-Related
Injuries and Illnesses), 83% of claims
identified were captured by workers’
compensation as primary payer (Florida
DOH, 2011). It should be noted that
these percentages are influenced by the
total number of captured cases and in
both sources the authors presume that
they did not capture all relevant cases.
III. Hospital Discharge Data
Hospital discharge data are the only
surveillance data presented in this risk
assessment for which work-relatedness
is not an inclusion criterion; therefore,
researchers relying on this data need to
take an additional step to assess workrelatedness for each case that introduces
the possibility that work-related cases
are not recognized as such and are thus
excluded. Researchers identifying workrelated cases typically use a
combination of workers’ compensation
as the primary payer or ICD codes for
external cause of injury. As discussed in
the previous section, workers’
compensation is not always used by
workers, so relying on this variable will
lead to undercounting. For external
cause of injury codes (e.g., E900.9
Excessive heat of unspecified origin),
researchers have found that these are
not always present or accurate for workrelated injury cases (Hunt et al., 2007),
which isn’t unexpected given that they
aren’t required for reimbursement. For
instance, codes indicating the location
of occurrence were present in 43% of
probable work-related injury cases the
authors reviewed (Hunt et al., 2007).
Harduar Morano and Watkins (2017)
used external cause of injury codes to
identify work-related emergency
department visits and hospitalizations
for heat-related illnesses in Florida.
They found that 2.8% of emergency
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70742
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
department visits, 1.2% of
hospitalizations, and 0% of deaths were
identified solely by an external cause of
injury code for work.
Both workers’ compensation claims
and hospitalization data are also
affected by the accuracy of diagnostic
codes for identifying heat-related cases.
While the use of ICD codes for
surveillance of heat-related deaths,
illnesses, and injuries is widely
accepted, it is not infallible, as these
codes are designed for billing rather
than surveillance. The use of specific
codes is up to the discretion of
healthcare providers, so practices may
vary by provider and facility. Healthcare
providers may not always recognize that
a patient’s symptoms are heat-related
and thus, they may not record a heatspecific ICD code. For example, a
patient who presents to the emergency
room after fainting would likely be
diagnosed with ‘‘syncope’’ (the medical
term for fainting). If the provider is
aware that the patient fainted due to
heat exposure, they should record a
heat-specific ICD–10 code, T67.1 Heat
syncope. However, if the provider is
unaware that the patient fainted due to
heat exposure (or otherwise fails to
recognize the connection between the
two), they may record a non-heatspecific ICD–10 code, R55 Syncope and
collapse. Researchers suspect
underreporting when ICD codes are
used for surveillance of HRIs (Harduar
Morano and Watkins, 2017) and
recommend researchers use all possible
fields available (e.g., primary diagnosis,
secondary diagnosis, underlying cause
of death, contributing cause of death).
Researchers examining trends in heatrelated illnesses using electronic health
records for the Veterans Health
Administration identified a dramatic
increase in cases when ICD–10 was
adopted, suggesting that the coding
scheme in ICD–9 may have led to
systematic underreporting of heatrelated cases, at least for this population
(Osborne et al., 2023). The authors also
note that 8.4% of the HRI cases they
identified were captured using
unstructured fields (e.g., chief
complaint, reason for admission) and
not ICD codes.
Not all sick and injured workers go to
an emergency department or hospital
and those that do are likely to be more
severe cases. Unfortunately, estimating
the proportion of injured and sick
workers who do go to the hospital or
emergency room is difficult, given a lack
of data on this topic. In a 1998 CDC
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
written by NIOSH safety researchers, the
authors reported an analysis of
unpublished data from the 1988
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
National Health Interview Survey
(NHIS) Occupational Health
Supplement which found that 34% of
all occupational injuries were first
treated in hospital emergency
departments, 34% in doctors’ offices/
clinics, 14% in work site health clinics,
and 9% in walk-in clinics (NIOSH DSR
1998). 1988 was the last year that
NIOSH asked that question in the NHIS.
Care-seeking for workers experiencing
heat-related symptoms specifically may
be low. In a study evaluating postdeployment survey response data
among a subset of the Deepwater
Horizon oil spill responders (U.S. Coast
Guard), Erickson et al. found that less
than 1% of respondents reported
seeking medical treatment for heatrelated illness, yet 12% reported
experiencing any heat-related symptoms
(Erickson et al., 2019).
IV. BLS CFOI
CFOI is well-regarded as the most
complete and authoritative source on
fatal workplace injuries. However, the
approach used to classify the event and
nature codes by BLS is not immune to
misclassification of heat-related deaths.
BLS relies on death certificates, OSHA
fatality reports, news articles, and
coroner reports (among other sources) to
determine the primary or contributing
causes of death. The criteria for defining
a heat-related death or illness can vary
by State, and among physicians,
medical examiners, and coroners.
Additionally, individuals who fill out
death certificates are not necessarily
equipped to make these distinctions or
confident in their accuracy (Wexelman,
2013). Depending on State policies,
individuals performing this role may be
a medical professional or an elected
official with limited or no medically
relevant experience (National Research
Council, 2009; CDC, 2023).
Researchers estimating fatality rates
attributable to heat in the overall U.S.
population using historical temperature
records have produced much higher
counts than approaches solely using
death certificates (Weinberger et al.,
2020). While outside the U.S., a recent
study examining causes of death among
migrant Nepali workers in Qatar from
2009–2017 demonstrated that deaths
coded as cardiovascular-related (e.g.,
‘‘cardiac arrest’’) among these mostly
young workers were unexpectedly
common and correlated with higher wet
bulb globe temperatures, suggesting that
these deaths may have been heat-related
but not coded as such (Pradhan et al.,
2019). Heat-related deaths are uniquely
hard to identify if the medical
professional didn’t witness the events
preceding the death, particularly
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
because heat can exacerbate an existing
medical condition, acting as a
contributing factor (Luber et al., 2006).
C. Summary
In conclusion, the available evidence
indicates that the existing surveillance
data vastly undercount cases of heatrelated injuries and illnesses among
workers. OSHA additionally believes
that the inclusion of unexposed workertime in the denominator for incidence
estimates underestimates the true risk
among heat-exposed workers.
V. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests information and
comments on the following questions
and requests that stakeholders provide
any relevant data, information, or
additional studies (or citations)
supporting their view, and explain the
reasoning for including such studies:
• Are there additional data or studies
OSHA should consider regarding the
annual incidence of HRIs and heatrelated fatalities among workers?
• OSHA has identified data from
cohort-based and time series studies
that would suggest higher incidence
rates than data from surveillance
datasets (e.g., BLS SOII, workers’
compensation claims). Are there other
data from cohort-based or time series
studies that OSHA should rely on for
determining risk of HRIs to heatexposed workers?
• Are employers aware of
occupational HRIs that are not reported
through BLS SOII, workers’
compensation claims, or hospital
discharge data? How commonly do HRIs
occur that are not recorded on OSHA
300 logs?
• Are there additional data or studies
that OSHA should consider regarding
the extent of underreporting and
underestimating of HRIs or heat-related
fatalities?
B. Basis for Initial and High Heat
Triggers
I. Introduction
In this section, OSHA presents the
evidence that forms the basis of the heat
triggers contained in the proposed
standard. These triggers are based on the
heat index and wet bulb globe
temperature (WBGT). The WBGT
triggers are based on NIOSH exposure
limits (i.e., the REL and RAL), which are
supported by empirical evidence dating
back to the 1960s and have been found
to be highly sensitive in capturing
unsustainable heat exposures.
Although there are no consensusbased heat index exposure limits for
workers, the question of which heat
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
index values represent a highly
sensitive and appropriate screening
threshold for heat stress controls in the
workplace has been evaluated in the
peer-reviewed scientific literature. The
evidence described below provides
information on the sensitivity of
alternative heat index values, that is, the
degree to which a particular heat index
value can be used to screen for potential
risk of heat-related injuries and illnesses
(HRIs) and fatalities. OSHA looked at
both experimental and observational
evidence, including efforts to derive
more accessible and easily understood
heat index-based triggers from WBGTbased exposure limits, to preliminarily
determine appropriate heat index values
for triggering heat stress control
measures. Each of these evidence
streams has strengths and limitations in
informing this question.
Relevant experimental evidence in the
physiology literature is often conducted
in controlled laboratory settings among
healthy, young volunteers, but the
conditions may not always mimic
conditions experienced by workers (e.g.,
workers often experience multiple days
in a row of working in high
temperatures). Observational evidence
does not have this limitation because
the data are collected among actual
workers in real-world settings. However,
observational evidence is potentially
affected by exposure misclassification
since exposure metrics are often derived
from local weather stations and rely on
maximum daily values. Experimental
data does not have this limitation, since
the laboratory conditions are highly
controlled, including the exposure
levels.
OSHA used both streams of evidence
to support proposing an initial heat
trigger of 80 °F (heat index) and a high
heat trigger of 90 °F (heat index). The
observational evidence that OSHA
identified suggests that the vast majority
of known occupational heat-related
fatalities occur above the initial heat
index trigger, making it a sensitive
trigger for heat-related fatalities. The
vast majority of nonfatal occupational
HRIs also occur above this trigger. The
experimental evidence (specifically the
WBGT-based exposure limits) also
suggests that when there is high radiant
heat, a heat index of 90 °F would be an
appropriate time to institute additional
controls (e.g., mandatory rest breaks).
This is supported by observational
evidence that shows a rapidly declining
sensitivity above a heat index of 90 °F.
OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
the experimental evidence also supports
the selection of these triggers as highly
sensitive and therefore protective.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
II. Observational Evidence
To determine an appropriate initial
heat trigger, OSHA sought to identify a
highly sensitive screening level above
which the majority of fatal and nonfatal
HRIs occur. This could presumably be
used to identify the environmental
conditions for which engineering and
administrative controls would be most
important to prevent HRIs from
occurring. One challenge for
determining this trigger level is that
many factors influence an individual’s
risk of developing an HRI. In addition
to workload, PPE, and acclimatization
status, the risk of developing an HRI is
also influenced by workers’ abilities to
self-pace at their jobs as well as whether
there had been exposure to hot
conditions on the prior day(s). There are
also medications and comorbidities that
may increase workers’ risk of HRIs (see
discussion in Section IV.O., Factors that
Affect Risk for Heat-Related Health
Effects).
The observational studies reviewed by
OSHA used retrospective temperature
and humidity data matched to the
locations where HRIs and fatalities
occurred over a period of time.
Although these studies did not account
specifically for workload, PPE use,
acclimatization status, or other relevant
factors, the HRI cases studied included
worker populations where these factors
were likely present to varying degrees.
Therefore, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that retrospective
observational data collected among
workers who have experienced fatal or
nonfatal HRIs on the job is valuable to
informing a screening level that reflects
the presence of these multiple risk
factors among worker populations.
These studies are summarized in the
following sections.
A. Fatalities
In a doctoral dissertation from 2015,
Gubernot matched historic weather data
to the heat-related fatalities reported in
BLS CFOI (fatality data described in
Section V.A., Risk Assessment) between
2000–2010 (Gubernot, 2015). Gubernot
used historic, weather monitor-based
temperature and dew point
measurements from the National
Climatic Data Center to recreate the heat
index (using daily maximum
temperature and daily average dew
point) on the day of each fatality. If
there was not already a monitor in the
county where a fatality occurred, then
the next closest weather monitor to that
county was used. Of the 327 fatalities
identified as being related to ambient
heat exposure (i.e., cases with secondary
heat sources, like ovens, were
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70743
excluded), 96.3% occurred on a day
with a calculated heat index above 80 °F
and 86.9% occurred on a day above
90 °F. Using a higher threshold such as
a heat index of 95 °F would have only
captured approximately 71% of
fatalities (estimated from Figure 4–2 of
the study). The author also evaluated
how many cases occurred on a day
when a National Weather Service
(NWS)-defined excessive heat event
(EHE) was declared. In a directive to
field offices, the NWS outlines when
offices should issue excessive heat
warnings—when there will be 2 or more
days that meet or exceed a heat index
of 105 °F for the Northern U.S. and
110 °F for the Southern U.S., with
temperatures not falling below 75 °F
(although local offices are allowed to
use their own criteria) (NWS, 2024a).
Gubernot appears to have used a
simpler criterion to evaluate the
sensitivity of these EHEs—whether the
heat index on the day of the fatality was
at or above 105 °F for northern States
and at or above 110 °F for southern
States. Only 42 fatalities (12.8%)
occurred on days meeting the EHE
definitions, suggesting EHEs are not a
sensitive trigger for occupational heatrelated fatalities. During the SBREFA
process, small entity representatives
suggested that OSHA consider the NWS
EHE definitions as options for the initial
and/or high heat triggers, but based on
these findings (and those reported in
other studies summarized in this
section), OSHA has preliminarily
determined that these criteria are not
sensitive enough and would not
adequately protect workers.
Some limitations of this analysis
include the use of nearest-monitor
exposure assignment, as well as the use
of maximum temperature with average
dew point to calculate heat index, both
of which may introduce exposure
misclassification. Although the author
did not refer to the latter as a daily
maximum heat index, this estimate
would most closely approximate that
value, which would suggest that
workers were likely exposed to heat
index values below that level during the
work shift leading up to the fatality.
In a meta-analysis published in 2020,
Maung and Tustin (both affiliated with
OSHA at the time) conducted a
systematic review of studies, such as the
one described above by Gubernot, where
researchers retrospectively assigned
heat exposure estimates to occupational
heat-related fatalities (Maung and
Tustin, 2020). The purpose of their
meta-analysis was to identify a heat
index threshold below which
occupational heat-related fatalities do
not occur (i.e., a highly sensitive
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70744
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
threshold). Maung and Tustin identified
418 heat-related fatalities among
civilian workers across 8 studies.
Approximately three quarters of these
civilian fatalities (n=327; 78%) came
from Gubernot 2015. The authors found
a heat index threshold of 80 °F to be
highly sensitive for civilian workers—
96% of fatalities (402 of 418) occurred
on days with a heat index estimate at or
above this level. A heat index threshold
of 90 °F had slightly lower sensitivity—
approximately 86% (estimated from
table 1 and figure 3 of their study).
Similar to the findings reported in
Gubernot 2015, one of the NWS
thresholds for issuing heat advisories
(heat index of 105 °F) did not appear to
be a sensitive trigger, missing 68% of
civilian worker fatalities.
The limitations for Gubernot 2015
apply to this analysis as well. These
analyses (including the data from
Gubernot, 2015) were limited to outdoor
workers, potentially limiting the
generalizability of the findings. This
analysis also relied on single values
(e.g., daily maximum heat index) to
capture exposure across a work shift. As
pointed out by Maung and Tustin, it is
important to consider that exposure
characterizations using daily maximum
heat index likely over-estimates the
exposures that workers experience
throughout the shift leading to the
fatality. For example, a fatality
occurring on a day with a daily
maximum heat index of 90 °F likely
involved prolonged exposure to heat
index values in the 80s °F.
In 2019, a group of OSHA researchers
published a similar analysis for both
fatal and nonfatal HRIs reported to
OSHA in 2016 among outdoor workers
(Morris CE et al., 2019). They identified
17 fatalities in this subset and used
nearest weather station data to estimate
daily maximum heat index on the day
of the fatality. All 17 fatalities occurred
on a day with a daily maximum heat
index of at least 80 °F (the lowest was
at 88 °F). A daily maximum heat index
of 90 °F had a sensitivity of
approximately 94%, while 100 °F had a
sensitivity of approximately 35%. A
major limitation with this analysis is its
small sample size (n=17 fatalities).
B. Non-Fatalities
Morris et al., identified 217 nonfatal
HRIs among outdoor workers reported
to OSHA in 2016 (Morris CE et al.,
2019). They found that 99% of these
cases happened on a day with a daily
maximum heat index of at least 80 °F.
There is a steep decline in sensitivity for
daily maximum heat index values in the
90s °F—89% for 90 °F but
approximately 58% for 100 °F
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(estimated from Figure 5 of the study
which combines fatal and nonfatal
cases)—suggesting that many nonfatal
HRIs occur on days when the heat index
does not reach 100 °F. One limitation of
this dataset is potential selection bias,
because the dataset only included cases
that were reported to OSHA. This study
therefore did not include cases in State
Plan States.
A much larger analysis conducted
among emergency department (ED)
visits in the Southeastern U.S. was
published by Shire et al. (Shire et al.,
2020). The authors identified 5,017
hyperthermia-related ED visits among
workers in 5 southeastern States
(Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
and Tennessee) between May and
September in 2010–2012. While the
previously described studies used
nearest monitor data, Shire et al. used
data from the North American Land
Data Assimilation System (NLDAS),
which incorporates both observation
and modeled data to fill in gaps between
locations of monitors, providing data at
a higher geographic resolution (0.125°
grid). Since the authors only had ED
visit data at the county level, they used
the NLDAS data to compute populationweighted, county-level estimates of
daily maximum heat index using all the
grids within each county. They found
that approximately 99% of ED visits
occurred on days with a daily maximum
heat index of at least 80 °F and about
95% of cases on days with a maximum
heat index of at least 90 °F.
Approximately 54% of cases occurred
on days with a daily maximum heat
index of 103 °F or higher. This further
supports the finding from Morris et al.
(2019) that sensitivity declines steeply
above a heat index of 90 °F. One
limitation of this analysis is the use of
the emergency department location as
the basis for the exposure assignment,
which has the potential to introduce
exposure misclassification if workers
were working far away from the ED
facility.
In a 2016 doctoral dissertation,
Harduar Morano conducted a
retrospective analysis of 3,394 heatrelated hospitalizations and ED visits
among Florida workers in May-October
between 2005–2012, using data from the
weather monitor nearest to the zip codes
where the hospitalizations and ED visits
occurred to characterize heat exposure
(Harduar Morano, 2016). The vast
majority of cases occurred on a day with
a daily maximum heat index of at least
80 °F, with approximately 91% of cases
occurring on a day with a maximum
heat index of at least 90 °F (estimated
from Figure 6–4). There was also a 13%
increase in the HRI hospitalization and
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
ED visit rate for every 1 °F increase in
heat index at values below 99 °F (Figure
6–4, Lag 0 plot of the study), suggesting
that potential triggers in the mid-to-high
90’s would increasingly miss many
cases. One limitation of this analysis
and that conducted by Shire et al. is that
hospitalization and ED visit data did not
include enough information to
distinguish between indoor vs outdoor
workers; it is possible that indoor
workers could have been exposed to
conditions not captured by the weather
data (such as working near hot
industrial processes).
In addition, four studies of workers’
compensation data in Washington
State—three of which were reported in
Section V.A., Risk Assessment—have
examined maximum temperature or
heat index on the days of reported HRIs
(Bonauto et al., 2007; Spector et al.,
2014; Hesketh et al., 2020; Spector et al.,
2023). Hesketh et al., 2020 (an update
on Bonauto et al., 2007) matched
weather data to addresses for the HRI
claims in the State’s workers’
compensation database between 2006
and 2017 (Hesketh et al., 2020). They
found that, of the 905 claims for which
they had temperature data, over 75% of
HRIs occurred on days with a maximum
temperature of at least 80 °F and
approximately 50% of claims occurred
on days with a maximum temperature of
at least 90 °F (estimated from Figure 2).
They also reported that approximately
75% of claim cases occurred when the
hourly maximum temperature was at
least approximately 79 °F. This paper is
part of the rationale for Washington
State lowering the trigger level in its
heat-specific standard from 89 °F to
80 °F—the old trigger of 89 °F had
missed 45% of cases in this dataset
(Washington Dept. of Labor &
Industries, 2023). A similar study
published in 2023 expanded the dataset
used by Hesketh et al. to include HRI
claims from 2006 to 2021 (n=1,241)
(Spector et al., 2023). The authors used
gridded meteorological data from the
PRISM Climate Group at Oregon State
University and geocoded accident
location (or business location or
provider location if accident location
was unable to be used) to determine the
maximum temperature on the day of the
event. They found that 76% of HRI
claims occurred on a day with a
maximum temperature of at least 80 °F
(this increased to 79% when restricted
to cases that were ‘‘definitely’’ or
‘‘probably’’ outdoors). A major
limitation of these studies is the use of
ambient temperature, limiting the
ability to compare findings to other
papers that relied on the heat index. In
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Spector et al. 2014, the authors
calculated the daily maximum heat
index for each county with an HRI in
their dataset on the date of injury
(Spector et al., 2014). They obtained the
county of injury and, when not
available, imputed the location of the
injury rather than using the employer
address, which is assumed to be more
accurate for characterizing exposure. In
their analysis of 45 agriculture and
forestry worker HRI claims between
1995–2009 that had corresponding
weather data, Spector et al. found that
75% of HRI claims occurred on days
when the maximum heat index was at
least 90 °F, whereas only 50% occurred
on days when it was at least 99 °F and
25% for 106 °F.
C. Summary
In summary, researchers have
identified a heat index of 80 °F as a
highly sensitive trigger for heat-related
fatalities (capturing 96–100% of
fatalities) and nonfatalities (99–100%)
among workers (excluding results from
Washington State). When looking at
ambient temperature, researchers in
Washington found that 75–76% of HRI
claims occurred on a day with a
maximum ambient temperature of 80 °F
or greater. Multiple studies additionally
identified a rapidly declining sensitivity
above a heat index of 90 °F, suggesting
that additional protective measures (e.g.,
observation for signs and symptoms of
HRIs) are needed once the heat index
reaches approximately 90 °F.
One of the common limitations of the
analyses presented in this section is the
use of a single reading (e.g., daily
maximum heat index) to capture each
affected worker’s exposure on the day of
the event. In reality, conditions
fluctuate throughout the day, so relying
on maximum measures would likely
overestimate heat exposure across the
workday. The use of nearest monitor
weather data is also likely to lead to
exposure misclassification. The
inclusion of indoor workers in some of
the studies is also a limitation, since the
exposure for those workers could be
very different (e.g., if there is process
heat). In Spector et al. 2023, the authors
noted an increase in the percent of cases
occurring on days with a maximum
temperature of 80 °F when restricting to
cases that definitely or probably
occurred outdoors. In all these studies,
researchers can only examine
conditions for the cases that were
captured in the surveillance systems.
There could be a bias such that cases
occurring on hotter days were more
likely to have been coded as heat-related
and included in these databases. Failure
to ascertain HRI cases occurring at lower
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heat indices could have skewed the
findings upwards, making it appear that
hotter thresholds were more sensitive
than they actually were. Finally, the use
of heat index (or ambient temperature)
ignores the impacts of air movement as
well as radiant heat, which can
substantially increase the heat stress a
worker is exposed to and increase the
risk of an HRI.
III. Experimental Evidence
NIOSH has published exposure limits
based on WBGT in its Criteria for a
Recommended Standard going back
multiple decades.3 These exposure
limits—the REL and RAL—account for
the contributions of wind velocity and
solar irradiance, in addition to ambient
temperature and humidity. (ACGIH has
published similar exposure limits—the
TLV and AL.) In addition to WBGT,
NIOSH and ACGIH heat stress
guidelines require the user to account
for metabolic heat production (through
the estimation of workload) and the
contributions of PPE and clothing. The
user adds an adjustment factor to the
measured WBGT to account for the
specific clothing or PPE worn
(specifically those ensembles that
impair heat loss) and uses a formula
based on workload to estimate the
exposure limit. They then compare the
measured (or adjusted, if using a
clothing adjustment factor) WBGT to the
calculated exposure limit to determine
if the limit is exceeded. Work-rest
schedules with increasing time spent on
break can further increase the exposure
limit.
These exposure limits and guidelines
are based in empirical evidence, such as
laboratory-based trials conducted in the
1960s and 1970s. This basis for WBGT
exposure limits is described in detail by
both NIOSH and ACGIH (NIOSH, 2016;
ACGIH, 2017). These exposure limits
have been tested and found to be highly
sensitive (100%) in modern laboratory
conditions in capturing unsustainable
heat exposures (i.e., when a steady
increase in core temperature is
observed) (Garzon-Villalba et al., 2017).
Among workers in real-world settings,
these WBGT-based exposure limits have
been found to be highly sensitive for
fatal outcomes (100% in one study; 92–
100% in another) and, although slightly
less so, still sensitive for nonfatal
outcomes (73% in one study; 88–97% in
another); however, these studies are
limited by their small sample size and
retrospective characterization of
3 NIOSH plays an important role in carrying out
the purpose of the OSH Act, including developing
and establishing recommended occupational safety
and health standards (29 U.S.C. 671).
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70745
workload, acclimatization status, and
clothing/PPE use (which are required
for accurately estimating WBGT-based
exposure limits) (Tustin et al., 2018b;
Morris CE et al., 2019).
Two papers have attempted to apply
the concepts of the WBGT-based
exposure limits to the more easily
accessible and understood heat index
metric. Based on the relationship
between WBGT and heat index, Bernard
and Iheanacho developed a screening
tool that reflects heat stress risk based
on heat index and workload category—
light (180 W), moderate (300 W), and
heavy (415 W)—using assumptions
about radiant heat but ignoring the
contributions of wind and clothing
(Bernard and Iheanacho, 2015). To do
this, they created a model predicting
WBGT from the heat index. From this
model, WBGT estimates were produced
within a 1 °C range for heat index values
of 100 °F or more but the model was less
accurate at heat index values below
100 °F. Using their reported screening
table, which allows the user to adjust for
low vs high radiant heat, an
acclimatized worker performing a heavy
(415 W) workload in high radiant heat
outdoors would be above the WBGTbased exposure limit and in need of a
break at a heat index of 90 °F. The same
worker, if unacclimatized, would be
above the exposure limit at a heat index
of 80 °F. These findings support the
provision of 15-minute breaks at a heat
index of 90 °F in OSHA’s proposed
standard, as well as the provision
requiring these breaks for
unacclimatized workers at a heat index
of 80 °F (unless the employer is
following the gradual acclimatization
schedule and providing breaks if
needed). The authors noted that high
radiant heat indoors could require even
greater adjustments to the heat index.
As further evidence for the need to
adjust these values for radiant heat
exposure, Morris et al. (2019) reported
that for the days on which HRIs
occurred in their dataset, cloud cover
was often minimal suggesting there was
exposure to high radiant heat when the
HRIs occurred.
More recently, Garzón-Villalba et al.
used an experimental approach to
derive workload-based HI heat stress
thresholds (Garzón-Villalba et al., 2019).
The researchers used data from two
progressive heat stress studies of 29
acclimatized individuals. Participants
were assigned different work rates and
wore different clothing throughout the
trials, serving as their own controls.
Once thermal equilibrium was
established, the ambient temperature
was increased in five-minute intervals
while holding relative humidity
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70746
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
constant. The critical condition defined
for each subject was the condition at
which there was a transition from a
stable core body temperature to an
increasing core body temperature (i.e.,
the point at which heat exposure
became unsustainable). Using the
results from these trials, the authors
established an equation deriving a heat
index exposure limit (equivalent to the
TLV or REL) at different metabolic rates
for a worker wearing woven clothing:
HI benchmark (°C) = 49¥0.026 M
Where M is workload in Watts.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Garzón-Villalba et al. assessed the
effectiveness of the proposed heat index
thresholds for predicting unsustainable
heat stress by using receiver operating
characteristic curves and area-underthe-curve (AUC) values to determine
predictive power (this technique is
commonly used to evaluate the
predictive power of diagnostic tests).
The AUC value for the proposed heat
index thresholds with subjects wearing
woven clothing was 0.86, which is
similar to that of the WBGT-based
thresholds, based on the authors’ prior
analysis (Garzón-Villalba et al., 2017).
This result showed that the heat index
thresholds derived by Garzón-Villalba et
al. (2019) would reasonably identify
unsustainable heat exposure conditions.
Compared to the heat index
thresholds proposed by Bernard and
Iheanacho (2015), the heat index
thresholds proposed by Garzón-Villalba
et al. are the same at low metabolic rates
(111 °F for 180 W) but higher at higher
metabolic rates: 105.8 °F versus 100 °F at
300 W and 100.4 °F versus 95 °F at 415
W (Note: these values are unadjusted for
radiant heat). This is likely because the
ACGIH WBGT-based exposure limits,
upon which Bernard and Iheanacho
based their heat index thresholds, are
intentionally more conservative at
higher metabolic rates, whereas GarzónVillalba used a less conservative linear
model to derive their heat index
thresholds (Garzón-Villalba et al., 2019).
When adding an adjustment for full
sunshine provided by the authors, the
proposed heat index-based exposure
limit derived from the Garzón-Villalba
et al. (2019) equation for a worker
performing a very heavy workload (450
W) is 92.8 °F.
Thus, laboratory-derived heat index
thresholds for unsustainable heat
exposure are higher than heat index
thresholds shown in observational
studies to be sensitive for predicting the
occurrence of HRIs. There are several
reasons that may explain why values
determined to be sensitive in laboratory
settings are higher than those reported
among workers in real-world settings.
For one, volunteers in laboratory studies
are often young, healthy, and
euhydrated (i.e., beginning the trial
adequately hydrated). They are also not
exposed to consecutive days of heat
exposure for eight-hour or longer work
shifts. Working in hot conditions on the
prior day has been demonstrated in the
literature to be a risk factor for HRIs,
even among acclimatized individuals
(Garzón-Villalba et al., 2016; Wallace et
al., 2005). Therefore, the use of
volunteers and exposure conditions in
laboratory-based trials may not always
provide good proxies for workers and
the environments in which they work.
There is also significant inter-individual
variability in heat stress tolerance,
which may mean trial studies with few
participants might not capture the full
range of heat susceptibilities faced by
workers.
In summary, long-established and
empirically validated occupational
exposure limits exist for WBGT. In
observational studies, WBGT exposure
limits have been found to be highly
sensitive for detecting fatal HRIs among
workers and, although slightly less so,
still sensitive for nonfatal outcomes
(although these studies are limited by
small sample size and retrospective
work characterization). Research efforts
to crosswalk the WBGT-based exposure
limits to the more accessible heat index
metric have demonstrated that a heat
index of 90–92.8 °F would represent an
appropriate trigger for controls such as
mandatory rest breaks for acclimatized
workers performing heavy or very heavy
workloads in high radiant heat
conditions (Bernard and Iheanacho,
2015; Garzón-Villalba et al., 2019). For
unacclimatized workers performing
heavy workloads in high radiant heat
conditions, a heat index trigger of 80 °F
would be in line with the WBGT-based
exposure limits (Bernard and Iheanacho,
2015). Although these two studies
suggest that higher triggers could
reasonably be applied to workers
performing lighter workloads, the
assumptions used may not always apply
to workers (e.g., no exposure to working
in the heat the prior day, healthy,
euhydrated). This may explain, at least
in part, the discrepancy in findings
between the observational and
experimental studies discussed in this
section.
IV. State Standards and NonGovernmental Recommendations
In their heat-specific standards,
summarized in the table below, States
use various initial and high heat
triggers, some of which depend on the
clothing or gear worn by workers.
OSHA’s proposed triggers are generally
in line with those used by these States.
OSHA is proposing using the same
initial heat trigger (heat index of 80 °F)
as Oregon’s existing standard and
Maryland’s proposed standard (Or.
Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or.
Admin. R. 437–004–1131 (2022); Code
of Maryland Regulations 09.12.32: Heat
Stress Standards (2024)). California and
Colorado use an ambient temperature
trigger of 80 °F for outdoor work sites
and agricultural sites, respectively, as
does the Washington standard for
workers wearing breathable clothing
(Cal. Code of Regulations (CCR), tit. 8,
section 3395 (2015); 7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103–15 (2022); Wash. Admin.
Code sections 296–62–095 through 296–
62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023)). California’s
proposed indoor standard uses an
ambient temperature trigger of 82 °F
(CCR, tit. 8, section 3396 (2023)).
The high heat trigger that OSHA is
proposing (heat index of 90 °F) is the
same as Oregon’s existing standard and
Maryland’s proposed standard.
California and Colorado use an ambient
temperature high heat trigger of 95 °F,
while the Washington standard uses
90 °F. The California indoor proposal
uses an ambient temperature or heat
index trigger of 87 °F to impose
additional requirements.
TABLE V–2—SUMMARY OF TRIGGERS USED IN VARIOUS HEAT-SPECIFIC STANDARDS AT THE STATE LEVEL
State
Setting
California .............................
Washington .........................
Outdoor ..............................
Outdoor ..............................
California (proposal) ...........
Indoor .................................
80 °F
80 °F
52 °F
82 °F
Oregon ................................
Maryland (proposal) ............
Indoor/Outdoor ...................
Indoor/Outdoor ...................
80 °F (Heat Index) ........................
80 °F (Heat Index) ........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:16 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Initial heat trigger
Frm 00050
(Ambient) .............................
(Ambient) (all other clothing)
(non-breathable clothes).
(Ambient) .............................
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
High heat trigger
95 °F (Ambient).
90 °F (Ambient).
87 °F (Ambient or Heat Index), except for certain clothing or in high radiant heat (82 °F).
90 °F (Heat Index).
90 °F (Heat Index).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70747
TABLE V–2—SUMMARY OF TRIGGERS USED IN VARIOUS HEAT-SPECIFIC STANDARDS AT THE STATE LEVEL—Continued
State
Setting
Initial heat trigger
Colorado .............................
Indoor/Outdoor Agriculture
only.
80 °F (Ambient) .............................
High heat trigger
95 °F (Ambient) or other conditions.
Note: There are different provisions required at each trigger by each State.
In the Heat Stress and Strain chapter
of their most recent TLV booklet,
ACGIH recommends establishing a heat
stress management plan when heat
stress is suspected (ACGIH, 2023). One
criterion they provide for determining
when heat stress may be present is
whether the heat index or air
temperature is 80 °F. In comments
received from small entity
representatives during the SBREFA
process and a public commenter during
the ACCSH meeting on April 24, 2024,
OSHA heard feedback that the agency
should consider different triggers that
vary by geography. Neither the ACGIH
TLV/REL nor NIOSH REL/RAL vary by
geography; these formulas are used
globally. Additionally, California
regulators, in their existing outdoor heat
standard and their proposed indoor heat
standard, use single State-wide triggers,
despite the State experiencing a wide
range of microclimates (e.g., both desert
and coastal areas exist in the State).
Such microclimates would make it
difficult to identify appropriate
geographically specific triggers, as
factors like elevation and humidity can
vary widely even within a specific State
or region. OSHA has also heard from
stakeholders who suggested that the
triggers in a proposed rule should be
presented simply, which would be
challenging if there were multiple
triggers for different parts of the
country.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
V. Summary
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily
finds that the experimental and
observational evidence support that heat
index triggers of 80 °F and 90 °F are
highly sensitive and therefore highly
protective of workers. These triggers are
also generally in-line with current and
proposed triggers in State heat-specific
standards. Therefore, OSHA is
proposing an initial heat trigger of heat
index of 80 °F and a high heat trigger of
heat index of 90 °F. OSHA is also
proposing to permit employers to use
the WBGT-based NIOSH RAL and REL,
which are supported by empirical
evidence and have been found to be
highly sensitive in capturing
unsustainable heat exposure.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether OSHA has adequately
identified, documented, and correctly
interpreted all studies and other
information relevant to its conclusion
about sensitive heat triggers;
• Whether there are additional
observational studies or data that use
more robust exposure metrics (e.g., more
than daily maximum heat index) to
retrospectively assess occupational heat
exposure on the day of heat-related
fatalities and nonfatal HRIs;
• Whether OSHA should consider
other values for the initial and/or high
heat trigger and if so, what evidence
exists to support those other values;
• The appropriateness of using heat
index to define the initial and high heat
triggers;
• Whether OSHA should explicitly
incorporate radiant heat into the initial
and/or high heat triggers, and if so, how;
• Whether OSHA should explicitly
incorporate clothing adjustment factors
into the initial and/or high heat triggers,
and if so, how;
• Whether OSHA should use different
triggers for different parts of the
country, and if so, how;
• The appropriateness of applying the
same triggers to employers who conduct
on-site measurements as opposed to
employers who use forecast data; and
• Whether OSHA should consider an
additional trigger specific to heat waves
or sudden increases in temperature and,
if so, whether there are definitions of
heat waves that are simple and easy-toapply.
C. Risk Reduction
I. Introduction
OSHA identified and reviewed
dozens of studies evaluating the
effectiveness of various controls
designed to reduce the risk of heatrelated injuries and illnesses (HRIs). The
studies captured include observational
and experimental studies that examined
the effect of either a single control or the
combined effect of multiple controls.
These studies were conducted among
civilian workers, athletes, military
personnel, and volunteers.
Observational studies conducted
outside the U.S. were included if OSHA
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
determined the work tasks to be
comparable to those of U.S.-based
workers. OSHA also examined
systematic review articles that
summarized the literature on various
individual controls.
OSHA acknowledges that
observational studies evaluating the
effectiveness of multi-pronged
interventions or programs in reducing
HRI incidence in ‘‘real-world’’
occupational settings are the most
relevant for assessing the reduction in
risk of the proposed rule. However,
OSHA identified very few of these
studies in the literature review and
determined there to be some limitations
in extrapolating their findings to the
proposed rule. Therefore, OSHA also
examined studies looking at the
effectiveness of single interventions,
many of which were experimental in
design.
One limitation of the experimental
studies—often conducted in laboratory
settings—is that they were not
conducted in ‘‘real-world’’ occupational
settings. However, some of these studies
were designed to simulate actual work
tasks and work environments, which
increases the generalizability for
occupational settings (i.e., the extent
that the study results can be applied to
employees exposed in the workplace).
Additionally, one advantage of
experimental studies is that they can be
conducted under controlled conditions
and are thus able to better measure
endpoints of interest and control for
confounding variables. Experimental
studies are also sometimes able to
examine situations in which subjects
experience high levels of heat strain
because the close physiological
monitoring of subjects allows the study
to be stopped before the subject is at risk
of heat stroke or death.
Although many of these studies
evaluated measures of heat strain (e.g.,
core body temperature, heart rate) rather
than instances of HRIs, OSHA believes
that these metrics are important for
understanding risk of HRIs. As
discussed in Section IV., Health Effects,
these metrics are intermediary
endpoints on the path to HRIs (e.g., heat
stroke, heat exhaustion). The controls
required in the proposed standard are
effective in that they reduce or slow the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70748
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
accumulation of heat in the body, which
in turn reduces the risk of HRIs.
OSHA also examined and
summarized systematic review articles
that reviewed and discussed the
experimental literature. These articles
were written by prominent heat safety
experts (in either an occupational or
athletic context) and were typically
conducted using a consensus-type
approach. OSHA also looked outside the
peer-reviewed literature for consensus
statements, reports, recommendations,
and requirements from governmental
bodies and non-governmental
organizations.
Despite the limitations noted above,
the studies, review articles, and nonpeer reviewed sources presented in this
section represent the best available
evidence OSHA has identified regarding
the effectiveness of controls designed to
reduce the risk of HRIs. The following
summary of OSHA’s findings
demonstrates that the requirements of
the proposed rule will be effective in
reducing the risk of HRIs among
workers.
II. Evidence on the Effectiveness of
Individual Control Measures
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Systematic Reviews and Consensus
Statements
Several publications have
summarized the literature on the
efficacy of controls to reduce the risk of
HRI in the form of review articles or
consensus statements. For example,
Morris et al. (2020) assessed systematic
reviews, meta-analyses, and original
studies on heat-related intervention
strategies published in English prior to
November 6, 2019, that included studies
conducted at ambient temperatures over
28 °C or among hypohydrated (i.e., fluid
intake is less than water lost through
sweat) participants, used healthy adult
participants, and reported physiological
outcomes (e.g., change in heart rate, core
temperature, thermal comfort) and/or
physical or cognitive performance
outcomes. Most of the captured articles
were from the exercise literature, but 9
of the 36 systematic reviews (i.e., a
detailed and comprehensive reviews of
relevant scientific studies and other
evidence) mentioned occupational
exposure in various professions, such as
military personnel, firefighters, and
emergency responders. A second search
identified 7 original studies that were
not covered in the systematic reviews.
Based on their systematic review, the
study authors identified the following
effective interventions: environmental
conditioning (e.g., fans, shade, airconditioning); optimal clothing (e.g.,
hats; loose fitting, light/brightly colored/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
reflective, breathable, clothing;
ventilation patches in PPE; cooling
garments/PPE); physiological adaptation
(e.g., acclimatization, improving
physical fitness); pacing (e.g., reduced
work intensity, breaks); hydration and
nutrition (e.g., hydration, electrolytes);
and personal cooling options (e.g., cold
water ingestion, water immersion). They
also noted that ‘‘a generally under
investigated, yet likely effective . . .
intervention is to utilize pre-planned
breaks in combination with the cooling
interventions mentioned above.’’ Morris
et al. (2020) also noted that
‘‘maintaining hydration is important for
maintaining cognitive and physical
performance’’ (Morris et al., 2020).
Morrissey et al. (2021b) assembled 51
experts with experience in physiology,
occupational health, and HRIs to review
and summarize current data and gaps in
knowledge for eight heat safety topics to
develop consensus recommendations.
The experts created a list of 40 heat
safety recommendations within those
eight topics that employers could
implement at their work site to protect
workers and to avoid productivity losses
associated with occupational heat stress.
These recommendations for each of the
eight topics included:
(1) Hydration: e.g., access and
availability to cool, potable water;
training on hydration; addressing
availability of fluids during rest breaks
in the prevention plan;
(2) Environmental monitoring: e.g.,
measurements as close to the work site
as possible; consideration of
environmental conditions (e.g.,
temperature, humidity, wind speed,
radiance), work demands, PPE, and
worker acclimatization status in
assessing heat stress; including
environment-based work modifications
(e.g., number of rest breaks) in a
prevention plan;
(3) Emergency procedures and plans:
e.g., availability of an emergency plan
for each work site; identification of
personnel to create, manage, and
implement the plan; making available,
rehearsing, and reviewing the plan
annually;
(4) Body cooling: e.g., availability of
rest/cooling/hydration areas made
accessible to workers as needed; cooling
during rest breaks (e.g., immersion,
shade, hydration, PPE removal); use of
fans (at temperatures below 40 °C
(104 °F)) or air-conditioners; use of
portable cooling strategies (e.g., ice,
water, ice towels) in areas without
electricity; use of cooling strategies
before, during, and after work; cooling
PPE used under other PPE when PPE
can’t be removed;
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(5) Acclimatization: e.g., creation and
implementation of a 5–7 day
acclimatization plan; plans for both new
and returning workers that are tailored
to factors such as environmental
conditions and PPE; training on benefits
of acclimatization;
(6) Textiles/PPE: e.g., use of clothing/
PPE that is thin, lightweight, promotes
heat dissipation, that fits properly, and
adequately protects against hazards; PPE
with ventilated openings; removal of
PPE/extra layers during rest periods;
(7) Physiological monitoring: (e.g.,
checking heart rate/body temperature);
and
(8) Heat hygiene: e.g., annual training
on heat related illness, prevention, first
aid, and emergency response in
language and manner that is easily
understood; designated personnel or
‘‘buddy approach to monitor for
symptoms’’; communication strategies
to inform employees of heat mitigation
strategies before the work shift,
healthcare worker using examination
results (if examinations are required or
recommended) to educate employees.
Racinais et al. (2015) presented
consensus recommendations to reduce
physiological heat strain and optimize
sports performance in hot conditions
that were developed in roundtable
discussions by a panel of experts. While
recommendations were focused on
athletes, the study authors noted that
current knowledge on heat stress is
mainly available from military and
occupational research, with information
from sport sciences available only more
recently. The study authors
recommended three main interventions.
The first recommendation, considered
to be most important by study authors,
was acclimatization, involving repeated
training in heat for at least 60 minutes
a day over a 1–2 week period. The
authors explained that acclimatization
attenuates the physiological strain of
heat by improving cardiovascular
stability and electrolyte balance through
an increase in sweat rate, skin blood
flow, and plasma volume. The second
recommendation was drinking sufficient
fluids to maintain adequate hydration
before and after exercise. Study authors
explain that sweating during exercise
can lead to dehydration which, if not
mitigated by fluid intake, has the
potential to exacerbate cardiovascular
strain and reduce the capacity to
exercise in the heat. The third
recommendation was cooling methods
to reduce heat storage and physiological
strain (e.g., fanning, iced garments/
towels, cold fluid intake, cooling vests,
water immersion). Additional
recommendations for event organizers
included planning for shaded areas,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
I. Observational Studies
cooling and rehydration facilities, and
longer recovery periods (i.e., break
periods) for hydration and cooling.
B. Summary for Systematic Reviews and
Consensus Statements
In conclusion, OSHA reviewed three
sets of recommendations on effective
controls to prevent HRI developed by
scientific experts following extensive
literature reviews. A number of the
recommendations were consistent with
requirements or options in OSHA’s
proposed standard. For example, all
three groups of experts recommended
hydration, rest breaks, shade, cooling
measures such as fans, and
acclimatization (Morris et al., 2020;
Morrissey et al., 2021b; Racinais et al.,
2015). Two of the expert groups also
recommended cooling methods such as
air conditioning (Morris et al., 2020;
Morrissey et al., 2021b). One of the
groups recommended environmental
monitoring, development of emergency
procedures and plans, training, a buddy
system to monitor for health effects, and
communication of heat mitigation
strategies (Morrissey et al., 2021b).
III. Experimental and Observational
Evidence
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Rest Breaks
Administrative controls, such as
varying employees’ work schedules, are
a well-accepted and long-standing
approach to protect workers from
occupational hazards. Administrative
controls are regularly used to address
limitations in human capacity for
physical work and commonly include
work-rest cycles. Rest breaks provide an
opportunity for workers to reduce their
metabolic rate and body temperature
periodically throughout the day. Length
and frequency of breaks can be adjusted
based on heat exposure, workload,
acclimatization, and clothing/PPE
factors. Such an approach of work-rest
cycles that consider these factors has
been recommended by NIOSH and
ACGIH (NIOSH, 2016; ACGIH 2023).
Observational and experimental studies
show the effectiveness of rest breaks in
reducing heat strain that could lead to
HRIs, and those studies are described
below. In addition to reducing heat
strain, rest breaks allow workers to take
advantage of other cooling strategies,
such as hydrating, removing PPE, and
sitting in areas that are shaded, cooled,
or fanned. The literature on the efficacy
of rest breaks described below includes
observational studies of workers,
laboratory-based exercise trials, and
predictive modeling.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Several observational studies
examined participants in work settings
or training exercises while at work and
at rest and evaluated the associations
between rest breaks or time at rest and
markers of heat strain.
Horn et al. (2013) evaluated core body
temperature and heart rate (HR) among
nine firefighters (six male and three
females, ages 20–45 years) over a 3-hour
period in which four repeat bouts of
firefighting drills were conducted
(approximately 15–30 minutes each)
while wearing full PPE and a selfcontained breathing apparatus. The
drills were separated by three rest
periods (approximately 20–40 minutes
each) in which the firefighters were
encouraged to hydrate and cool down
by removing their gear, while being
evaluated/critiqued by instructors and
refilling air cylinders. The study authors
estimated the duration of work and rest
cycle lengths based on sustained rates of
heart rate increases and decreases.
Ambient temperatures ranged from
15 °C to 25 °C (59–77 °F) during the
summer and fall months when this
study was conducted. During work
cycles, mean maximum core
temperatures ranged from 38.4–38.7 °C,
mean peak heart rate ranged from
181.2–188.4 beats per minute (bpm),
and the mean average heart rate
(averaged over 60 second intervals per
work cycle) ranged from 139.6–160.0
bpm. Mean maximum core temperature
and mean average heart rate decreased
during rest periods, and the study
authors concluded that physiological
recovery in this study appeared to be
closely linked to the duration of rest
periods. Rest break duration was
significantly and negatively correlated
with the following measurements taken
during rest breaks: minimum heart rate
(r: ¥0.687, p<0.001), average heart rate
(r: ¥0.482, p=0.011), and minimum
core temperature (r: ¥0.584, p=0.001),
indicating that longer breaks result in
reduced heat strain. The authors
concluded that the association was
independent of obesity, fitness, and
intensity of firefighting activities.
Limitations noted by study authors
included enrollment of young
firefighters who were screened for
cardiovascular disease, and thus might
not represent the whole firefighting
population. In addition, ‘‘significant
breaks’’ were provided and the duration
of exposure to fires was shortened later
in the day, both factors that might
underestimate increases in core
temperatures with longer firefighting
activities and shorter breaks.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70749
Petropoulos et al. (2023) characterized
heat stress and heat strain in a cohort of
569 male outdoor workers in Nicaragua
(sugarcane, plantain, and brickmaking
industries) and El Salvador (sugarcane,
corn, and construction industries)
across three workdays in 2018. Median
wet bulb globe temperatures (WBGT)
ranged from 26.0–29.2 °C (78.8–84.6 °F)
and median heat index ranged from
28.5–36.1 °C (83.3–97.0 °F) at the work
sites. Time spent on rest breaksestimated based on physical activity
data collected with an accelerometer
(i.e., a device that can be used to
measure physical activity and sedentary
time)—was estimated at 4.1–21% of the
shift. A 10% increase in the time spent
on break was associated with a 1.5%
absolute decrease in median percent
maximum heart rate (95% CI: ¥2.1%,
¥0.85%; p<0.0001), when adjusting for
industry/company, job task, shift
duration, liquid consumption, median
WBGT, and mean metabolic rate.
Petropoulos et al. (2023) found no
significant associations between rest
breaks and maximum core body
temperature, and concluded that the
lack of findings could have been due to
incomplete control of confounding
factors.
Lucas et al. (2023) examined the
effects of recommended rest breaks for
sugarcane workers in Nicaragua,
specifically in male burned cane cutters,
by comparing the period from 2019–
2020, identified as Harvest 3 (H3; n=40
burned cane cutters) with the period
from 2018–2019, identified as Harvest 2
(H2; n=12 burned cane cutters). OSHA
notes that a major limitation of the
study identified by authors was a
shorter shift duration by 1 to 2 hours for
seed cutters (SC) during H2, and that
‘‘the shorter shifts in H2 likely affected
SC workload comparisons between H2
and H3 and could explain why
increasing the rest component in H3 did
not reduce the physiological workload
in this group.’’ Because of this
limitation in seed cutters, this summary
focuses on effects on burned cane
cutters. In H3, an extra 10-minute rest
break was recommended (increasing
recommended rest breaks to a total of 80
min over a six-hour shift), and
interventions from H2 were continued
(e.g., improvements to hydration and
movable tents, in addition to delaying
cutting after burning to reduce radiant
heat exposure). Daily average WBGT
was higher in H2: 29.5 °C (85.1 °F) than
in H3: 26.7 °C (80.6 °F). Rest periods
were defined by a greater than 10 bpm
drop in heart rate lasting 4 or more
minutes, as determined by continuous
measurements by heart rate sensors
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70750
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
worn on the chest; based on those
measurements, the rest/work ratio for
burned cane cutters increased slightly
from 21% rest in H2 to 26% rest in H3.
Average percent maximum heart rate
(adjusted for age) decreased slightly in
H3 compared to H2 (mean [95% CI]
63% [60–65%] to 58% [56–60%]) across
the work shift). No significant
differences were noted for estimated
core temperatures (based on modeling)
from H2 to H3. The study authors
acknowledged that observational study
design, small number of workers in H2,
and the lower temperatures in H3 may
make conclusions uncertain; therefore
experimental laboratory studies may
better test the impact of the
intervention. OSHA also observes that
the increased number of burned cane
cutters observed from H2 to H3 means
that the population of workers observed
was different in the two periods and
results may have been affected by
different characteristics of the workers.
Ioannou et al. (2021a) examined the
effectiveness of rest breaks of different
durations in agricultural, construction,
and tourism employees. Findings in the
intervention group were compared to a
‘‘business as usual’’ (BAU) group, where
workers followed their normal routine.
Of note, shaded areas, water stations,
and air-conditioned areas to be used for
rest breaks were part of BAU for
construction workers in Spain; those
same interventions were part of BAU for
construction workers in Qatar, in
addition to requiring workers to carry a
water bottle, and education. BAU
practices were not specified for the
agriculture and tourism industries, but
according to communications with
study authors, the BAU agricultural
employees in Qatar were not offered
scheduled work/rest cycles, and
agricultural employees who were
monitored in Qatar performed low
intensity work (Communication with
Leonidas Ioannou, April 2024).
Endpoints observed included core
temperature, skin temperature, heart
rate, and metabolic rate. No significant
effects compared to the BAU group were
observed for any of these endpoints for
agricultural workers in Cyprus provided
with a 90-second break every 30
minutes, tourism workers in Greece
provided with a 90-second break every
30 minutes or a 2-minute break every 60
minutes combined with ice slurry
ingestion, or construction workers in
Spain provided with two 7-minute
breaks over the workday. For employees
in Qatar who were provided with 10minute breaks every 50 minutes,
significant differences in the
intervention group compared to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
BAU group included lower mean skin
temperature, heart rate, and metabolic
rate for construction employees, but
increased heart rate for agricultural
employees. The study authors
postulated that the increased heart rate
in agricultural workers resulted from
inherent changes in body posture (i.e.,
moving from a crouching position while
crop picking to standing and walking
during breaks). A limitation in this
study is that some BAU groups, which
were used as comparison groups,
appeared to have access to breaks in airconditioned areas and it was not
described how the frequency or
duration of rest breaks varied between
the intervention and BAU groups.
Two additional studies were
conducted in utility workers. In a case
study by Meade et al. (2017), conducted
in an unspecified location, four highly
experienced electrical utilities workers
were observed via video analysis over
two consecutive hot days. The study
authors noted that employees often
spent 80% or more of the monitoring
period working in direct sunlight.
Meade et al. (2017) reported similar
average core body temperatures and
average %HRmax on both days, despite
an increase in the percentage of time
spent at rest on Day 2 versus Day 1 (time
at rest: 66 ± 5%, range: 60–71%, on Day
2 versus 51 ± 15%, range: 30–63% on
Day 1). Three of the four workers had
a higher peak core temperature on Day
2 than Day 1. The study authors
attributed these core temperature and
heart rate trends in part to residual heat
storage or fatigue-related changes in
work efficiency that possibly occurred
over two consecutive work shifts.
Meade et al. (2016a) observed work and
rest periods in 32 electrical utilities
workers (mean age of 36 years; 11
ground workers, 9 bucket workers, 12
manual pole workers; 17 in West
Virginia, 15 in Texas) via video analysis
and accelerometry over 1 day (Heat
Index: West Virginia 48 ± 3 °C (118.4 °F),
Texas 42 ± 3 °C (107.6 °F)). On average,
the work-to-rest ratio was (3.1 ± 3.9):1
and workers rested for a total of 35.9 ±
15.9% of the work shift. Heat index,
work-to-rest ratios, work shift duration,
and time at rest were not significantly
correlated with mean core temperature
or %HRmax. However, time spent or
percentage of time in heavy work was
moderately, positively correlated with
mean core temperature (r=0.51) and
%HRreserve (r=0.40) (i.e., increased
time spent in heavy work was
associated with increased mean core
temperature and %HRmax). OSHA
notes limitation in these studies,
including, for example, the very small
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
sample size in Meade et al. (2017) and
lack of adjustment for possible
confounding factors in Meade et al.
(2016a).
A limited number of cross-sectional
studies surveyed or interviewed
employees for self-reported symptoms
of HRI to determine possible risks
associated with inadequate breaks.
These types of studies are the most
limited because of uncertainties such as
recall bias (i.e., inaccurate recollection
of previous events or experiences) and
the potential for dependent
misclassification as a result of using
self-reporting for characterizing both the
exposure and outcome. Therefore, only
brief summaries of these studies are
provided. Two of these studies were
conducted in agricultural workers in the
U.S. (Spector et al., 2015; Fleischer et
al., 2013), and one was conducted in
pesticide applicators in Italy (Riccò et
al., 2020). Spector et al. (2015) found a
significantly increased odds of HRI in
workers paid by piece as compared to
workers paid hourly (OR: 6.20, 95% CI:
1.11, 34.54). Spector et al. (2015) noted
that piece rate workers might work
harder and faster because of economic
incentives, thus leading to increased
metabolic heat generation; however,
adjustment for task and exertion in the
small sample size of employees did not
completely attenuate the observed
association, thus suggesting other
factors contributed to development of
symptoms. Through population
intervention modeling, Fleischer et al.
(2013) estimated that the prevalence of
three or more HRI symptoms could be
reduced by 6.0% if workers had access
to regular breaks, and by 9.2% if breaks
were taken in shaded areas. Of note,
participants in the study were asked
about ‘‘regular breaks,’’ but the term was
not specified regarding frequency and
duration. Lastly, Riccò et al. (2020)
found taking rest breaks in shaded, nonair-conditioned areas was associated
with experiencing HRI (adjusted OR:
5.5, 95% CI: 1.4, 22), while taking rest
breaks in cooler, air-conditioned areas
was not. Riccò et al. (2020) discussed
possible reasons for the observed
association between shaded rest breaks
and incidences of HRI, including that
(1) taking breaks in shade may be
insufficient to prevent HRIs among
pesticide applicators who undertake
more strenuous tasks or have longer
exposures to unsafe limits, and (2) rest
breaks in shade may be taken to
alleviate, rather than prevent, HRI
symptoms (i.e. possible reverse
causation).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
II. Experimental Studies
OSHA examined a number of
laboratory studies that provide
information on the efficacy of rest
breaks for preventing heat strain or HRI
in subjects exercising under conditions
that include high heat and at least
moderate activity. The studies typically
measured rectal temperature, which
allowed for an assessment of the
efficacy of breaks in maintaining lower
rectal temperatures and slowing the
increase in rectal temperatures. ACGIH
(2023) indicates that an increase in
rectal temperature exceeding 1 °C from a
‘‘pre-job’’ temperature of less than
37.5 °C might indicate excessive heat
strain. One study summarized below
also examines the effect of rest breaks
on the autonomic nervous system and
cardiovascular function.
Smallcombe et al. (2022) conducted a
study over a seven-hour period that was
designed to mimic a typical workday in
the U.S. In that study, 9 males (average
age 23.7 years) of varying fitness levels
walked on a treadmill at speeds to
maintain a constant heart rate of 130
bpm, which the authors indicated to be
the demarcation between moderate and
heavy strain. The subjects completed six
cycles of exercise for 50 minutes in the
heat chamber separated by 10 minutes
of rest at an ambient temperature of
21 °C (69.8 °F), 50% relative humidity
(RH) while drinking water as desired. A
one-hour lunch period was also
provided at 21 °C (69.8 F), 50% RH after
the third exercise period, with all
subjects given the same lunch and
allowed to drink water as desired. Each
subject was tested under 4 temperature
conditions: (1) referent (cool condition)
at 15 °C (59 °F) (WBGT = 12.6 °C); (2)
moderate condition at 35 °C (95 °F)
(WBGT = 29.4 °C); (3); hot condition at
40 °C (104 °F) (WBGT = 33.4 °C); and (4)
very hot condition at 40 °C (104 °F)
(WBGT = 36.1 °C). The RH for each
temperature condition was
approximately 50%, except for the very
hot condition, which was 70% RH. In
the very hot condition group, data were
limited for the sixth exercise cycle
because an unspecified number of
participants reached the cut-off point for
terminating the study (i.e., a heart rate
exceeding 130 bpm while at rest).
Significant increases in mean rectal
temperature were observed in the
moderate, hot, and very hot condition
groups in work period 1 versus work
period 6, but the average rectal
temperature remained at or below 38 °C
(100.4 °F) in all groups during each
exercise period (figure S1 and table S2)
(Smallcombe et al., 2022). No individual
subject had a rectal temperature that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
exceeded 38 °C in the referent and
moderate condition groups, however,
three subjects exceeded 38 °C in the hot
exposure group, and four subjects
exceeded 38 °C in the very hot exposure
group. With the exception of two
subjects whose rectal temperatures were
measured at approximately 38.6 °C
(101.5 °F) and 38.7 °C (101.7 °F) in the
very hot exposure group, all rectal
temperatures were below 38.5 °C (as
estimated from Figure S1). In addition,
mean rectal temperatures dropped
during each rest period, with all rectal
temperatures measured near or below
38 °C by the end of the rest period (as
estimated from Figure 4). Skin
temperatures did not increase during
work periods. The authors concluded
that under the conditions of this study,
which limited metabolic heat
production based on the fixed heart rate
protocol, participants rarely reached
levels of core temperature that would be
concerning. Study limitations noted by
study authors included possible limited
relevance of breaks provided in cooler
areas, and the possibility that thermophysiological impacts may have been
higher had breaks not been provided in
cooler areas or metabolic heat
production not been limited.
In Uchiyama et al. (2022) thirteen
males (average age 39 years) each
underwent two 225-minute trials that
included 180 minutes of treadmill
walking in a chamber at 37 °C (98.6 °F)
and 40% RH interspersed with 45
minutes of rest breaks in an airconditioned room at 22 °C (71.6 °F) and
35% RH, designed to mimic summer
working and rest conditions at mines in
Northwest Australia. Participants were
allowed to drink room temperature
water during exercise and refrigerated
water while on rest breaks. Two
different rest/work cycles were tested,
including (1) current practice: 1 hour of
work and 30 minutes of rest, followed
by 1 hour of work and 15 minutes rest,
and a final 1 hour work period; and (2)
experimental: 1 hour of work and 15
minutes rest, followed by three half
hour work periods separated by 10minute rest periods and, and a final half
hour work period. OSHA observes that
in the current practice group, average
core temperature only increased by
more than 1 °C (1.8 °F) of baseline level
at the final measurement reported at 180
minutes into the study (increased from
37.2 °C at baseline to 38.29 °C at 180
minutes). Average core temperatures
remained within 1 °C of baseline levels
in the experimental group at all time
points.
Three studies (Meade et al., 2016b;
Lamarche et al., 2017; and Kaltsatou et
al., 2020) conducted 2-hour studies in
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70751
which small groups of 9–12 males
cycled in a heat chamber at 360 watts
(W) of metabolic heat production
(considered moderate-to-heavy intensity
and equivalent to conditions
experienced by some workers in the
mining and utility industries). Over the
2-hour period, the effects of various
temperatures (approximate values
provided) and work/rest protocols
recommended by ACGIH were
examined including: (1) continuous
work at WBGT 28 °C (82.4 °F) (41 °C
(105.8 °F) dry-bulb, 19.5% RH or 36 °C
(96.8 °F) dry-bulb, 38% RH); (2) a 3:1
work/rest ratio (15 min work, 5 min
rest) at WBGT 29 °C (84.2 °F) (43 °C
(109.4 °F) dry-bulb, 17.5% RH or 38 °C
(100.4 °F) dry-bulb, 34% RH); and (3) a
1:1 work/rest ratio (15 min work, 15 min
rest) at WBGT 30 °C (86 °F) (46 °C
(114.8 °F) dry-bulb, 13.5% RH or 40 °C
(104 °F) dry-bulb, 30% RH). Meade et al.
(2016b) examined a fourth condition: 4)
a 1:3 work/rest ratio (15 min work, 45
min rest) at WBGT 31.5 °C (88.7 °F)
(46.5 °C (115.7 °F) dry-bulb, 17.5% RH).
The mean age of participants in the
Meade et al. (2016b) study was 21 years
while the mean age in both the
Lamarche et al. (2017) and Kaltsatou et
al. (2020) studies was 58 years.
Meade et al. (2016b) found that among
younger males, the percentages of
participants with rectal temperatures
exceeding 38 °C over the 2-hour protocol
was lower in the groups who took
longer rest breaks, despite those groups
also being subjected to a higher WBGT.
Meade et al. (2016b) reported core
temperatures exceeding 38 °C in 12% of
participants in the 1:3 work/rest at
31.5 °C WBGT group, 0% in the 1:1
work/rest at 30 °C WBGT group, 33% in
the 3:1 work/rest at 29 °C WBGT group,
and 33% in the continuous work at
28 °C WBGT group.
Lamarche et al. (2017) found that
among older males, the percentage of
participants with rectal temperatures
exceeding 38 °C over the 2-hour protocol
was lowest in the group with the longest
breaks (i.e., 67% in the 1:1 work/rest at
30 °C WBGT group, 100% in the 3:1
work/rest at 29 °C WBGT group, and
100% in the continuous work at 28 °C
WBGT group) although the findings did
not achieve statistical significance.
Lamarche et al. (2017) also reported that
time to exceed a rectal temperature of
38 °C was higher in both groups who
received rest breaks as compared with
the continuous work group and this did
reach statistical significance.
Specifically, the time to exceed a rectal
temperature of 38 °C was 100 minutes in
the 1:1 work/rest at 30 °C WBGT group,
79 minutes in the 3:1 work/rest at 29 °C
WBGT group, and 53 minutes in the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70752
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
continuous work at 28 °C WBGT group.
Further, because of heat exhaustion, five
participants in the Lamarche et al.
(2017) study did not complete the
continuous work at 28 °C WBGT
protocol, one did not complete the 3:1
work/rest at 29 °C WBGT protocol, but
all completed the 1:1 work/rest 30 °C
WBGT protocol. No significant
differences in heart rate were observed.
Kaltsatou et al. (2020) examined
autonomic stress and cardiovascular
function in the same subjects examined
by Larmarche et al. (2017). The authors
measured 12 markers of heart rate
variability (HRV), a predictor of adverse
heart events, most of which are
associated with the autonomic nervous
system (i.e., a part of the nervous system
that controls involuntary responses
including heart rate and blood
pressure). After one hour of
accumulated work and when rectal
temperatures exceeded 38 °C, three
markers of HRV were significantly lower
in the continuous work group than in
the 3:1 work/rest at 29 °C WBGT group.
One marker of HRV was significantly
lower in the continuous group,
compared to the 1:1 work/rest at 30 °C
WBGT group at 1 hour of accumulated
work. After 2 hours of accumulated
work, 4 markers of HRV were
significantly lower in the continuous
work group compared to the 1:1 work/
rest at 30 °C WBGT group. Study authors
interpreted these results to indicate that
continuous work was the least safe for
workers, while a 1:1 work/rest ratio
offered the best protection. Kaltsatou al.
(2020) concluded that breaks during
moderate-to-heavy work in heat can
reduce autonomic stress and increase
the time to exceed a rectal temperature
of 38 °C.
In the studies by Meade et al. (2016b),
Lamarche et al. (2017), and Kaltsatou et
al. (2020), participants were wellhydrated before the study period but not
provided drinking water during the
study. Kaltsatou et al. (2020)
acknowledged that not providing water
during the study could have affected
sweat secretion and, as a result heat
balance, hydration status, baroreceptor
function (involved in blood pressure
regulation), and the autonomic control
of heart rate. OSHA agrees and also
notes that rest breaks were provided in
the same ambient conditions as work
periods, and studies were conducted at
a fixed work rate that would have not
considered possible effects of selfpacing. Because hydration and shade or
cooling measures during rest breaks
would be provided as part of an
effectively implemented multi-pronged
approach to preventing HRI, OSHA
preliminarily concludes that some of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
effects observed in these studies might
have been less severe if interventions
other than rest were provided.
In a study by Chan et al. (2012),
recovery time, as measured by
physiological strain index (based on
heart rate and core temperatures), was
determined in 19 healthy construction
rebar employees (mean age 45 years)
who had worked until exhaustion at
building construction sites in Hong
Kong in July and August of 2011.
Average recovery during rest was
reported at 94% in 40 minutes, 93% in
35 minutes, 92% in 30 minutes, 88% in
25 minutes, 84% in 20 minutes, 78% in
15 minutes, 68% in 10 minutes, and
58% in 5 minutes. Yi and Chan (2013)
used the field-based meteorological and
physiological data reported by Chan et
al. (2012) to model ideal rest breaks to
minimize HRI. Based on a Monte Carlo
simulation, the authors determined that
a 15-minute break after 120 minutes of
continuous work in the morning at
28.9 °C (84.0 °F) WBGT and a 20-minute
break after 115 minutes of continuous
work in the afternoon at 32.1 °C WBGT
(90.0 °F) maximized productivity time
while protecting the health and safety of
employees.
III. Conclusions for Rest Breaks
OSHA reviewed several studies
examining the effectiveness of rest
breaks in preventing heat strain that
could lead to HRI and were of sufficient
quality for drawing conclusions (Horn et
al., 2013; Smallcombe et al., 2022;
Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al.,
2017; Kaltsatou et al., 2020; Petropoulos
et al., 2023). The studies, involving
individuals exposed to conditions of
high heat stress, demonstrated the
effectiveness of rest breaks in preventing
measures of heat strain that can lead to
HRI. Observational studies with detailed
measurements of temperatures in
firefighters doing training exercises and
experimental studies in laboratory
settings reported that rest breaks result
in lower core or rectal temperatures
during rest periods following work
periods (Horn et al., 2013; Smallcombe
et al., 2022), and lower rectal
temperatures over the study period
(Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al.,
2017), with all of the studies showing
greater effectiveness of longer compared
to shorter duration work breaks.
Similarly, Chan et al. (2012) reported
increased physiological recovery with
longer rest periods. Uchiyama et al.
(2022) reported little evidence of heat
strain in participants exercising in hot
conditions and provided rest breaks.
The study by Lamarche et al. (2017) also
found that rest breaks were effective in
preventing heat exhaustion in a
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
laboratory setting. OSHA also found
evidence showing that rest breaks can
reduce cardiovascular strain. For
example, Horn et al. (2013) found that
heart rates were lower in rest than in
work cycles. One study done in
participants in a laboratory setting
showed that rest breaks can reduce
autonomic stress that affects
cardiovascular function (Kaltsatou et al.,
2020). Those findings are consistent
with an observational study of
employees in occupational settings that
found an association between time
spent on rest breaks and decreases in
heart rate when adjusted for industry/
company, job task, shift duration, liquid
consumption, WBGT, and metabolic
rate (Petropoulos et al., 2023).
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily
finds rest breaks to be effective in
reducing the risk of HRI by modulating
increases in heat and cardiovascular
strain.
B. Shade
Working or resting in shade reduces
the risk of HRI by decreasing exposure
to solar radiation and in turn reducing
overall heat load. Studies evaluating the
impact of shade on heat strain metrics
have predominantly been conducted in
controlled settings where participants
exercise in conditions approximating
shade and sun exposure. Studies
evaluating the physiological benefits of
exercising in shade versus sun are likely
to underestimate the benefits of rest
breaks taken in shade because metabolic
heat generation would be slowed while
resting.
A number of studies examining the
effects of exercising under natural or
simulated conditions of sun or shade
have demonstrated benefits of shade.
One group of investigators conducted
studies where participants cycled under
simulated laboratory conditions of sun
or shade (Otani et al., 2016; Otani et al.,
2021); both studies were conducted
under conditions of 30 °C (86 °F) and
50% RH, and participants cycled at a
rate of 70% maximum oxygen uptake
until reaching full exhaustion. The
Otani et al. (2021) study also involved
exposures to low and high wind speeds.
The same investigators conducted 45minute, self-pacing cycling trials
outdoors under various natural sunlight
conditions, including clear skies or
thick and thin cloud covers (Otani et al.,
2019). These studies reported that
higher exposure to solar radiation
resulted in higher skin temperatures
(Otani et al., 2016, 2019, 2021) and
reduced work output (measured as
endurance capacity/time-to-exhaustion
(Otani et al., 2016; 2021) or power
output (Otani et al., 2019)). In increased
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
sun conditions, Otani et al. (2021)
reported higher rectal temperatures,
heart rates, and thermal sensation. Otani
et al. (2019) reported greater thermal
sensations, and body heat gain from the
sun, but no significant effects on rectal
temperature or heart rate in increased
sun conditions. Otani et al. (2016)
reported no differences in rectal
temperatures or heart rates in increased
sun conditions. The authors speculated
in their 2019 paper that the lack of
rectal temperature increase in that study
likely resulted from a reduction in selfregulated exercise under sunny
conditions (Otani et al., 2019). They did
not however speculate reasons for the
lack of rectal temperature increases in
their 2016 paper. OSHA notes that
under equivalent (full sun) solar
radiation levels the time it took
participants to reach exhaustion in the
Otani et al. (2021) study under low
wind speeds (35.4 minutes) was longer
than the time it took participants in the
Otani et al. (2016) study to reach
exhaustion (22.5 minutes), and OSHA
expects that the disparate findings on
rectal temperatures may have resulted
from differences in total cycling time.
In a study by Nielsen et al. (1988)
participants cycled at a fixed rate
outdoors in the sun for 60 minutes, were
shaded for 30 minutes while continuing
to cycle, and then cycled again in the
sun for another 30 minutes, for a total
of 120 minutes. Study authors noted
that cloud formation interrupted 3 of the
20 cycling trials. Average rectal
temperatures rose sharply during the
first period of cycling in sun, dropped
slightly (non-significantly) during the
period of cycling in shade, and then
gradually increased again during the
final cycling period in full sun. Skin
temperatures remained fairly constant
during the initial period of cycling in
sun, dropped significantly by 1.5 °C
(2.7 °F) while cycling in shade, and rose
again sharply during the final cycling
period in the sun. Heart rate, oxygen
consumption, and sweat rate were
significantly higher in the final cycling
period in full sun, compared to the
cycling period in shade. Study authors
concluded that heat received from direct
solar radiation ‘‘imposed a measurable
physiological stress.’’
In a study examining work capacity in
adults walking for one hour under
various conditions of solar radiation
(full sun or full shade), temperature
(25 °C through 45 °C; 77 °F through
113 °F), humidity (20% or 80%), and
clothing coverage, Foster et al. (2022b)
reported that work capacity (calculated
using treadmill speed and grade) was
generally lower under full sun
conditions than shaded conditions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Under humid conditions, work capacity
was reduced by solar radiation for all
scenarios. Under dry conditions, work
capacity reduction varied by clothing
coverage with those wearing full-body
work coveralls showing reduced work
capacity at temperatures ≥35 °C (≥95 °F)
and those wearing minimal clothing
showing reduced work capacity at
temperatures ≥40 °C (≥104 °F). Skin
temperature was generally higher under
full sun conditions, and the authors
speculated that a lack of effect on core
body temperatures likely resulted from
self-regulation during exercise.
Ioannou et al. (2021b) conducted a
laboratory based randomized control
trial in which seven participants
completed cycling trials under full sun
(800 W/m2) and full shade (0 W/m2) in
hot (WBGT 30 °C) and temperate (WBGT
20 °C) conditions. The full sun
condition was associated with increased
skin temperature at both temperatures.
Average core body temperature was
similar between sunny and shaded
conditions (37.7 and 37.6 °C for sun
versus shade in hot conditions and 37.2
°C for both sun and shade in temperate
conditions). Solar radiation had a small,
positive relationship with heart rate
(average heart rate of 114.0 and 109.1
bpm in sun versus shade in hot
conditions and 102.6 and 95.4 bpm in
sun versus shade in temperate
conditions) (Ioannou et al., 2021b).
Although these experimental studies
largely assessed the effects of shade
during exercise and not rest periods,
they do support the idea that shade
reduces heat strain generally; therefore,
OSHA preliminary concludes that it is
reasonable to assume access to shade
would also reduce heat strain during
rest periods. This conclusion is also
supported by evidence that shade
reduces heat exposure (see discussion
below) and that heat exposure is
positively associated with heat strain
(see discussion in Section IV., Health
Effects). OSHA identified no major
limitations in these studies that would
preclude their use in drawing
conclusions about effectiveness. One
aspect of all these studies that limit
applicability to the larger workforce is
that participants were all young and
healthy and all or mostly male (age was
not specified in Ioannou et al. (2021b)),
and the studies were done for relatively
short durations of time (2 hours or less).
The authors of the Otani et al. (2021)
and Foster et al. (2022b) studies that
used artificial solar radiation noted that
their studies would not reflect changes
in the sun’s position during the day or
changes in radiation intensity levels,
and that limitation would be relevant to
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70753
the other studies using artificial sources
of solar radiation at one intensity level.
There are also two observational
studies in the peer-reviewed literature
that have evaluated the association
between shade and risk of HRI. In a
case-control study of 109 acclimatized
construction and agriculture workers,
Ioannou et al. (2021b) monitored
workers for four or more consecutive 11hour shifts, in which environmental
factors were continuously measured and
work hours characterized by the same
thermal stress but different solar
radiation levels were isolated. Solar
exposure was categorized as either
indoors, mixed indoors and outdoors, or
outdoors, and analyses were done for
data collected during conditions of 30 °C
WBGT. Results included a positive
association between sun exposure and
skin temperature and a significantly
higher risk for heat strain symptoms
(relative risk (RR) = 2.40, 95% CI: 1.78,
3.24) and reported weakness (RR = 3.17,
95% CI: 1.76, 5.71) among workers
exposed to solar exposure characterized
as outdoors as compared to workers
exposed to solar exposure characterized
as indoors. Core body temperature, heart
rate, and metabolic rate were not found
to be associated with sun exposure. The
authors attributed the lack of change in
core temperature and heart rate to the
effect of self-pacing. OSHA notes that
the study did not control for
confounding variables.
Fleischer et al. (2013) used population
intervention modeling of self-reported
HRI symptoms in farmworkers in
Georgia to estimate that the prevalence
of three or more HRI symptoms could
have been reduced by 9.2% (95% CI:
¥15.2%, ¥3.1%) if workers could
always or usually take breaks in the
shade. There were limitations to this
analysis, including the cross-sectional
study design, the self-reported exposure
and outcome data, and low participation
rate.
Additional studies have evaluated
differences in microclimatic conditions
between shady and sunny
environments, independent of heat
strain metrics measured in human
subjects. These studies provide clear
evidence that shade reduces radiant
heat (Cheela et al., 2021; do Nascimento
Mós et al., 2022; Fournel et al., 2017;
Karvatte et al., 2016, 2021; Klok et al.,
2019; Lee et al., 2020; Middel and
Krayenhoff, 2019; Sanusi et al., 2016;
Zhang et al., 2022). As discussed above,
indicators of heat strain (e.g., rectal
temperature) often increase with
exposure to solar radiation. These
authors examined the impact of shade
through direct measures that assess
radiant heat (e.g., globe temperature,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70754
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
mean radiant temperature) or through
thermal stress metrics (e.g., Universal
Thermal Climate Index) that incorporate
radiant heat in their calculation.
The magnitude of the reduction in
radiant heat from shade, however, varies
by local conditions, with notable factors
including the type of shade (e.g., trees,
buildings, canopies, and other urban
structures such as solar arrays), percent
shade cover, time of day, season, and
ground cover (due to its role in radiant
heat emission). Fournel et al. (2017)
estimated an average 4.4 °C decrease in
black globe temperature using data from
five studies that assessed different shade
interventions, while study-specific
reductions ranged from 2 °C to 9 °C.
These included a study by RomanPonce et al. (1977), who observed a 9 °C
difference in Florida under an insulated
metal roof, and a study by Fisher et al.
(2008), who observed a 2 °C difference
in New Zealand under a shade cloth
structure. Examples of other studies that
have evaluated the impact of shade on
radiant heat include:
• Middel and Krayenhoff (2019)
evaluated environmental conditions
across 22 sites in Tempe, Arizona on the
hottest day of the summer. They
included diverse types of shade,
including trees and urban structures.
The authors concluded that trees
decreased afternoon mean radiant
temperature by up to 33.4 °C and
estimated that each 0.1 decrease in the
sky view factor from trees (where a sky
view factor of 1 is a completely open
sky and 0 is fully blocked) resulted in
an approximate decrease of 4 °C in mean
radiant temperature (Middel and
Krayenhoff, 2019).
• Zhang et al. (2022) compared
meteorological parameters among 12
locations in a coastal city in China.
Mean globe temperature over the beach
in full sun (40.9 °C) was higher than
mean globe temperatures in areas
shaded by dense trees (28.9 °C) or
shaded by a pavilion canopy (30.8 °C)
(Zhang et al., 2022).
• Karvatte et al. (2016) evaluated the
impacts of different types of natural
shade (two densities of eucalyptus trees
and isolated native trees) on
environmental conditions in Brazil.
Average black globe temperatures from
12 p.m. to 1 p.m. in the shade ranged
from 33.2 °C to 34.3 °C, which were
2.4 °C to 8.2 °C lower than that measured
in nearby sunny areas (Karvatte et al.,
2016).
• do Nascimento Mós et al. (2022)
evaluated the effectiveness of four
different shade structures (native trees,
black polypropylene netting, heatreflective netting, and a combination of
both types of netting) in the Brazilian
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
savanna. Mean radiant temperature was
consistently lower under shaded
conditions. For example, at 11 a.m. and
12 p.m., the peak hours, the mean
radiant temperatures were 16°C to 20 °C
lower in shady conditions than sunny
conditions (do Nascimento Mós et al.,
2022).
I. Conclusions for Shade
In conclusion, measurements of
environmental conditions indicate that
exposure to radiant heat is greater in full
sun than in shaded conditions (e.g.,
Middel and Krayenhoff, 2019; do
Nascimento Mós et al., 2022). It is well
known that radiant heat contributes to
heat stress (NIOSH, 2016). Studies
confirm that indicators of heat strain
(e.g., increased heart rate, increased
rectal temperature) are often higher in
participants exercising in conditions
with actual or simulated solar radiation
versus shade (e.g., Otani et al., 2021).
One study showed that a 30-minute
period of exercising in shade,
interspersed between two periods of
exercising in full sun, resulted in
improved physiological responses (e.g.,
lower heat rate, oxygen consumption,
and sweat loss) compared to the two
periods of exercising in full sun
(Nielsen et al., 1988). OSHA expects
that improvements in physiological
function might have been even greater if
the participants had rested in shade
because resting slows the metabolic
generation of heat.
OSHA preliminarily finds that resting
in shade will reduce the risk of HRI by
decreasing exposure to radiant heat that
contributes to heat stress and can lead
to heat strain and then HRI.
C. Fans
Fans are engineering controls that
increase air movement across the skin
and under the right environmental
conditions can increase the evaporation
of sweat, resulting in greater heat loss
from the body. However, they may not
be appropriate for all environments,
such as at higher temperatures. Research
on the role of fans in HRI prevention
largely focuses on non-occupational and
athletic populations, however some
chamber trials have been designed to
mimic working conditions. A summary
of the experimental literature is
provided here, beginning with studies
that evaluate the use of fans during
physical activity, before or after activity,
and while people are at rest, and then
concluding with studies that model
efficacy thresholds for fan use.
Studies by Saunders et al. (2005) and
Otani et al. (2018, 2021) examined the
effects of different air speeds on
individuals cycling in heated chambers
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
with no rest period included in the
study design (Saunders et al., 2005:
33.0 °C ± 0.4 °C and 59% ± 3% RH; air
speeds ranging from 0.2 km/hr to 50.1
km/hr; Otani et al., 2018: 30 °C and 50%
RH; air speeds ranging from 0 km/hr to
30 km/hr; Otani et al., 2021: 30 °C and
50% RH; air speeds of 10 and 25 km/
hr). In measures of work output, at
higher air velocities Saunders et al.
(2005) reported increased cycling time
before participants’ core temperature
reached 40 °C (criteria for terminating
the trial) and Otani et al. (2018, 2021)
reported increased time to exhaustion.
In lower/no compared to higher air
velocities, (1) Saunders et al. (2005)
reported higher mean body temperature
(weighted mean of skin and rectal
temperature), higher rectal and skin
temperature, increased heat storage (a
measure that considers changes in body
temperature, in addition to body weight
and surface area), and lower evaporative
capacity; (2) Otani et al. (2018) reported
higher rectal, skin, and mean body
temperature, and lower evaporative heat
loss; while (3) Otani et al. (2021)
reported no significant effect on skin
temperature but higher rectal
temperatures. Higher heart rates were
also observed at lower/no versus higher
air velocities (Saunders et al., 2005;
Otani et al., 2018, 2021).
Other studies have examined the
effectiveness of fans during both
exercise and rest periods. In Jay et al.
(2019), participants conducted arm
exercises designed to mimic textile
work at 30 °C (86 °F) and 70% RH, with
and without fanning. In a study by
Wright Beatty et al. (2015), participants
cycled in a chamber at 35 °C (95 °F) and
60% RH, with air velocities of 0.5 m/s
and 3.0 m/s. Wright Beatty et al.
designed the study to mimic
occupational conditions, like those for
miners (both workload and clothing).
Under the fan/high air velocity
conditions: (1) Jay et al. (2019) observed
a smaller increase in rectal temperature,
and lower skin temperature, but there
was no change in heart rate because the
study was designed to maintain a
constant heart rate; and (2) Wright
Beatty et al. (2015) observed lower rectal
temperatures and heart rates. Jay et al.
also compared effectiveness of fanning
to the presence of air-conditioning (7 °C
lower temperature) and found higher
work output and lower rectal
temperature in both the fanning and airconditioning groups (relative to the hot
condition without fanning), while sweat
loss was higher with fanning compared
to air-conditioning (Jay et al., 2019).
Wright Beatty et al. tested their
conditions among both older (∼59 years
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
old) and younger (∼24 years old)
participants and observed similar
benefits of higher air velocity among
both age groups (Wright Beatty et al.,
2015).
In a handful of other studies,
researchers tested the efficacy of fan use
during rest breaks, after subjects
exercised under hot conditions (Sefton
et al., 2016; Selkirk et al., 2004;
Barwood et al., 2009; Carter, 1999).
Conditions for these studies were (1)
Sefton et al.: 32 °C ± 0.5 °C and 75% ±
3% RH, with shirt and under shirt
removed during cooling, with and
without misting fan; (2) Selkirk et al.:
35°C and 50% RH wearing firefighting
protective clothing and breathing
apparatuses during exercise and
removal of protective gear during
cooling periods with and without a
misting fan; (3) Barwood et al.: 31 °C ±
0.2 °C and 70% ± 2% RH, with and
without whole body fanning; and (4)
Carter: 40 °C and 70% RH wearing
firefighting protective clothing and
breathing apparatuses during exercise
and removal or unbuckling of protective
gear during cooling periods with and
without a fan. In the study by Sefton et
al. (2016), rectal temperatures rose
during the cooling period, regardless of
misting fan use, but heart rate was lower
with misting fan use; the study authors
noted that under the high humidity
conditions of their study, misting fans
could have increased the moisture in
air, thereby reducing cooling through
sweat evaporation. Other studies found
fans or misting fans to be effective in
improving body temperature or cardiac
effects. In comparisons of normal
recovery conditions (unbuckling of firefighting coat and no fan use during rest)
to enhanced recovery conditions (firefighting coat was removed and fan used
during rest), Carter (1999) reported
lower rectal and skin temperatures,
heart rate, and oxygen consumption
during enhanced recovery compared to
normal recovery conditions. Selkirk et
al. (2004) reported that the use of a
misting fan during rest breaks compared
to no fan use resulted in lower rates of
rectal temperature increase, and lower
skin temperatures and heart rates.
Barwood et al. (2009) reported that
reductions in rectal and skin
temperatures during rest periods were
greater with fan use than without, but
there was no significant effect on heart
rate. Selkirk et al. (2004) also found that
participants were able to exercise longer
when taking rest breaks with misting
fans than they were when taking rest
breaks without misting fans, and
Barwood et al. (2009) found that
participants were able to run farther
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:16 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
distances following whole-body
fanning.
Other studies examined the use of
fans during breaks in areas cooler than
where exercise took place. Hostler et al.
(2010) conducted a study similar to that
by Selkirk et al., described above, where
subjects exercised on a treadmill while
wearing firefighting protective gear
under hot conditions (35.1 ± 2.7 °C, RH
not specified), but in contrast to Selkirk
et al. (2004), rest periods took place at
room temperature (24.0 ± 1.4 °C) instead
of in the heat chamber and a nonmisting fan was used. In contrast to
findings from Selkirk et al. (2004),
Hostler et al. (2010) reported that
fanning during breaks had no significant
effects on core temperature, heart rate,
or exercise duration, and they
speculated that this was because rest
breaks took place in a cooler area. The
authors conclude that active cooling
devices may not be needed if the
temperature of the rest area is below
24 °C (75.2° F). Tokizawa et al. (2014)
reported that after pre-cooling in an area
that was 28 °C and had 40% RH,
participants walking in a heat chamber
(37 °C and 40% RH) wearing protective
clothing had lower rectal temperatures,
heart rate, and weight loss when
exposed to fans and water spray in the
precooling period than the control
condition without fans and water spray
(Tokizawa et al., 2014).
Additional studies provide
information on conditions and
populations for which fans may or may
not be effective. Ravanelli et al. (2015;
2017) found that participants (mean age
24 ± 3 years) were able to be exposed
to higher levels of humidity at
temperatures of 36 °C or 42 °C when
using fans before increases in
esophageal temperatures and heart rate
were observed (i.e., inflection points)
(Ravanelli et al., 2015; Ravanelli et al.,
2017). At 42 °C, the inflection points
(when core temperature increases were
observed) occurred at a relative
humidity level of 55% with fans
compared to 48% without fans. The
relative humidity levels where heart rate
increases were observed with and
without fans, respectively, were 83%
and 62% at 36 °C and 47% and 38% at
42 °C. The researchers found that heart
rate was significantly lower at the end
of the trials with fans compared to
without fans (under 36 °C conditions: 74
± 9 bpm vs. 84 ± 9 bpm; under 42 °C
conditions: 87 ± 9 vs. 94 ± 9). This was
also true for esophageal temperatures at
the end of the trials (under 36 °C
conditions: 36.7 ± 0.2 °C vs. 36.8 ±
0.2 °C; under 42 °C conditions: 37.2 ±
0.3 °C vs. 37.4 ± 0.2 °C). Rectal
temperatures were higher with no fans
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70755
at the end of the trials in both
conditions (36 °C and 42 °C), but these
differences were not statistically
significant (Ravanelli et al., 2017). In
contrast, Gagnon et al. (2016) found that
use of fans did not improve heart rate
or core temperature inflection points in
response to increasing humidity levels,
and heart rates and core temperatures
were higher with use of fans during
exposure of older adults (mean age 68
± 4 years) at 42 °C. Gagnon et al.
speculated that lack of benefits may
have resulted from age-related
impairments to sweat capacity. Morris
NB et al. (2019) found that, under hot
and humid conditions (40 °C, 50% RH;
heat index of 56 °C) fans reduced core
temperatures and cardiovascular strain,
but were detrimental to all outcome
measures under very hot but dry
conditions (47 °C, 10% RH; heat index
of 46 °C). The authors use these findings
to caution against using heat index
alone for recommendations on
beneficial versus harmful fan use.
While the fan efficacy studies
discussed in this section so far have
been interventional in design, modeling
studies have estimated the temperature
and RH thresholds at which fans are no
longer effective at reducing heat strain.
Jay et al. (2015) argue that public health
guidelines for when fan use is harmful
are too ambiguous and/or too low (e.g.,
‘‘high 90s’’ from the CDC (CDC, 2022).
Morris et al. (2021) modeled humiditydependent temperature thresholds at
which fans (3.5 meters/second wind
velocity) become detrimental using
validated calorimetry equations, which
calculate net heat transfer between a
person and their environment. Based on
these equations and assumptions on
reduction in sweat rates among older
individuals and individuals taking
anticholinergic medications, Morris et
al. recommend that fans should not be
used at a humidity-dependent
temperature above 39.0 °C (102.2 °F) for
healthy young adults, 38.0 °C (100.4 °F)
for healthy older adults above the age of
65, and 37.0 °C (98.6 °F) for older adults
taking anticholinergic medication
(Morris et al., 2021). While the authors
provide more exact numbers that
account for humidity, they provide
these thresholds as simple and easy
guidelines that only require knowing
the temperature. Some limitations of
these studies include the use of
assumptions in their models that may
not be realistic (e.g., fan producing an
air velocity of 3.5–4.5 meters/second
sitting 1 meter away) and the use of
simplified heat-balance models, which
predict the potential for heat exchange
rather than outcomes such as heat and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70756
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
cardiovascular strain metrics (e.g., core
temperature, heart rate). There are many
factors that influence an individual’s
heat exchange potential, such as sex,
hydration status, acclimatization status,
and clothing, and these simplified
models often do not account for these
factors.
A recent article by Meade and
colleagues criticized the simplified
thresholds published in Morris et al.
(2021) as being too high for general
public health guidance (e.g.,
recommendations for the general public
during heat waves) (Meade et al., 2024).
The authors modeled core temperature
changes rather than modeling potential
for heat exchange, arguing that Morris
and colleagues did not consider in their
conclusions that the potential for greater
heat exchange does not always translate
into increased sweat rates, particularly
if core temperatures are not high enough
to elicit that sweat response. Meade and
colleagues modeled fan effectiveness
under various hypothetical
environmental conditions and reported
the expected impacts on core
temperatures for a young adult (18–40
years old) at rest wearing light clothing.
They estimated that fans (versus no fan)
would lead to an approximately 0.1 °C
increase in core temperature at ambient
temperatures of 37 °C/98.6 °F (when RH
is 60–90%), 38 °C/100.4 °F (when RH is
50–80%), and 39 °C/102.2 °F (when RH
is 50–80%) (Meade et al., 2024; Figure
1). Fans were estimated to be of minimal
impact (core temperature change of
approximately 0.0 °C) or beneficial
(reduction in core temperature)
compared to no fans in drier conditions
at these ambient temperatures (37–
39 °C). In their model, fans were always
minimally impactful or beneficial at
temperatures below 37 °C. Above 39 °C,
fans were more often harmful (increase
in core temperature greater than 0.2 °C).
These model results were for strong fans
(3.5–4.5 m/s air velocity), but in a
sensitivity analysis, Meade and
colleagues present predicted core
temperature changes for slower fans (1
m/s air velocity) among young adults.
While these fans are less beneficial than
strong fans at low temperatures (e.g.,
below 34 °C/93.2 °F), they were
predicted to lead to smaller core
temperature increases at higher
temperatures (e.g., 38 °C) and humidities
than the stronger fans (Meade et al.,
2024; Figure 4). In another model, the
researchers predicted the effects of fans
combined with skin wetting (relative to
no fan or skin wetting) among young
adults and found this combination was
much more beneficial than fans alone—
they were beneficial or neutral in all
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:16 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
combinations of humidity and ambient
temperature when ambient temperature
was 40 °C/104 °F or below (Meade et al.,
2024; Figure 6). One major limitation of
these model results is the assumption
that the individual is at rest, rather than
working. Fans may be used in work
areas, and it would be expected that
they would be associated with greater
heat exchange potential in these
scenarios, as core temperature would be
more likely to remain above levels that
prompt a sweat response. In a
sensitivity analysis, the authors
assumed a range of metabolic rates, the
highest being 90 W/m2, which they
describe as the equivalent to a seated
person ‘‘performing moderate arts and
crafts.’’ In this scenario, fans were
predicted to be more beneficial around
30–34 °C and in drier conditions (RH
less than 30%) up to 39 °C. These
numbers may not apply to workers, as
evidenced in part by findings from a
study described above (Carter, 1999),
which found benefits to fans outside the
range suggested by Meade et al.
Another study did evaluate fan
efficacy among participants performing
physical work (moderate to heavy
workloads), collecting empirical
evidence from fixed heart rate trials and
modeling the effects of fans on heat
storage at various temperatures and
humidities (Foster et al., 2022a). Foster
et al. conducted 300 trials among 23
participants (24 cool, 15 °C reference
trials, 138 hot trials with still air, and
138 hot trials with fans). The hot trials
involved a range of temperatures and
humidities (35–50 °C in 5 °C increments
and 20–80% RH) and two clothing
ensembles—low clothing coverage
(shorts and shoes) and higher clothing
coverage (full-body coverall, t-shirt,
shorts, and shoes). For the fan trials,
they used a fan with a speed of 3.5
meters/second. The work output from
the cool reference trials was used as a
baseline to calculate the change in work
capacity in the hot trials, which was
used to validate their biophysical model
predicting change in heat storage (Rsquared = 0.66). The authors created
categories for the percent change in
work capacity resulting from fan use
relative to no fans—an increase of
greater than 5% was termed
‘‘beneficial’’, a decrease of greater than
5% was termed ‘‘detrimental’’, and if
the change was an increase or decrease
of 5% or less, it was called
‘‘ineffective’’. In the hot trials, the
researchers found fans to be beneficial
or ineffective at both 35 °C and 40 °C
(depending on the humidity) and
ineffective at 45 °C for the higher
clothing coverage (Figure 1 of Foster et
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
al., 2022a). For the low clothing
coverage, the researchers found that fans
had the potential to be beneficial up to
45 °C (at certain humidities), but also
had the potential to be detrimental at
temperatures as low as 35 °C
(specifically when RH was 20%).
The biophysical model predicting
change in heat storage was only able to
model the effects of fans for the low
clothing coverage, however, the authors
note that the effects of fans were similar
across clothing groups except that fans
weren’t beneficial in the high clothing
coverage at temperatures equal to or
above 45 °C. Foster et al. used a sweat
rate in the model of approximately 1
liter per hour, which was the group
average from the trials. In Figure 4, the
authors present the output of their
model, which suggests that fans become
detrimental beginning at a temperature
of 39 °C (102.2 °F) (at certain
humidities). At increasing temperatures,
fan use is detrimental at a wider range
of humidity levels (both high and low
humidity), but beneficial or ineffective
at other humidity levels. Foster et al.
also present model results with varying
assumptions for sweat rate and fan
speed (Figure 6).
As discussed above, in their
consensus statement, Morrissey et al.
(2021b) recommend the use of electric
fans in an occupational setting when
ambient temperatures are below 40 °C/
104 °F.
I. Conclusions for Fans
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily
finds that these studies show that use of
fans during work and/or rest breaks will
be effective in reducing heat strain in
the majority of working age adults.
Studies also show that there are certain
conditions (e.g., at a temperature of
102.2 °F and above, depending on the
humidity) under which fans may not be
beneficial and can be harmful to
workers.
D. Water
Working and sweating in the heat put
workers at risk for dehydration and
HRIs. Replacing fluids lost as sweat is
necessary to maintain blood volume for
cardiovascular function and
thermoregulation. Multiple studies have
examined the efficacy of hydration
interventions, while also considering
various factors that may affect hydration
such as the quantity of liquid
consumed, timing of ingestion, and
beverage temperature.
Studies in the peer-reviewed
literature provide evidence that
hydration interventions are effective at
combating dehydration and HRI. For
example, McLellan and Selkirk
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
performed a series of heat stress trials
with 15 firefighters in Canada wearing
protective equipment at 35 °C (95 °F)
and 50% relative humidity (McLellan
and Selkirk, 2006). During the trials,
participants conducted light exercise in
a heat chamber and were provided one
of four fluid replacement quantities: no
fluid, one-third fluid replacement, twothirds fluid replacement, or complete
fluid replacement (based on previously
determined sweat rates). Each
participant completed two 20-minute
exercise periods, separated by a 10minute break for a simulated selfcontained breathing apparatus (SCBA)
change, and then followed by a 20minute rest break. Cool water was
provided during each break. Exercise
continued until participants reached an
endpoint, defined as a rectal
temperature over 39.5 °C (103.1 °F),
heart rate at 95% of maximum,
experiencing dizziness or nausea, or
other safety concerns. Participants who
received either two-thirds or full fluid
replacement tolerated approximately
20% more exposure time (including rest
periods spent in the heat chamber) and
approximately 25% more work time
(calculated by excluding rest periods)
than those without the fluid
replacement. Most participants who
were not provided fluids ended the trial
upon experiencing lightheadedness
when attempting to re-initiate exercise
after a break, possibly related to low
blood pressure. Those with two-thirds
and full fluid replacement took
significantly longer to reach an end
point during work time and those with
one-third, two-thirds, or full fluid
replacement had significantly longer
exposure time than those without fluid
replacement. The full fluid replacement
group also had higher rectal
temperatures at their trial endpoint
compared to those without fluid
replacement, possibly indicating that
hydration allowed them to tolerate
higher rectal temperatures. The authors
state that these findings are consistent
with previous literature that reports
cardiovascular function to be
compromised without fluid
replacement, leading to exhaustion at
lower core temperatures.
Ioannou et al. (2021a) advised
intervention groups made up of
agricultural workers in Qatar and
construction workers in Qatar and Spain
to consume 750 milliliters (mL) of water
supplemented by one tablespoon of salt
per hour over their work shift. Findings
in the intervention group were
compared to a ‘‘business as usual’’
(BAU) group, where workers followed
their normal routine, that were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:16 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
unspecified for the agricultural industry
and included shaded areas, water
stations, and air-conditioned rest break
areas for construction workers in Spain;
those same BAU conditions were
implemented for construction workers
in Qatar, in addition to requiring
workers to carry a water bottle, and
education. Results included: (1) 13% to
97% reductions in prevalence of
dehydration in each intervention group;
(2) no significant differences in core
temperatures for agricultural workers in
Qatar; (3) significant reductions in core
temperature in the construction
intervention groups in Qatar and Spain,
and (4) mixed findings on heart rate and
skin temperature across the sites. One
limitation with this paper is the use of
BAU as a control group, as it is not
always clear how these scenarios
differed from the intervention. In
addition, the quantity of fluid consumed
was not measured.
Drinking adequate amounts of water
may also reduce the risk of syncope.
Schroeder et al. assessed the effects of
water quantity on orthostatic tolerance
(as time to presyncope, the symptomatic
period right before fainting) in healthy
individuals (n=13) (Schroeder et al.,
2002). The authors used a controlled,
crossover design to test the effects of
consuming 500 versus 50 milliliters of
water prior to attempting to induce
presyncope by tilting the head-up and
applying negative pressure to the lower
body. They found that drinking the
larger amount of water improved
orthostatic tolerance by 5 minutes
(+/¥ 1 minute), increased supine (lying
down face up) mean blood pressure and
peripheral resistance, and was
associated with smaller increases in
heart rate. A recent study using a similar
design found that the temperature of the
water may also have an influence—cold
water consumption was associated with
increased systolic blood pressure, stroke
volume (i.e., increased volume of blood
pumped out of heart per beat), cerebral
blood flow velocity, and total peripheral
resistance, as well as reduced heart rate
relative to consuming room temperature
water (Parsons et al., 2023). They did
not find differences in orthostatic
tolerance between the groups. It should
be noted that neither of these papers
tested the participants under conditions
of high heat, but as is discussed in
Section IV., Health Effects, research has
shown that exposure to heat
independently increases the risk of
syncope. In addition, both syncope from
exposure to heat and the method used
to induce presyncope in these studies
can involve a mechanism in which
blood pools in the lower body.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70757
Public health guidance for workers
(e.g., from NIOSH) often involves
recommendations that workers consume
1 cup (237 mL) of water every 15–20
minutes or approximately 1 liter (711–
948 mL) per hour. The goal is to
replenish fluids lost through sweat and
avoid a substantial loss in total body
water content. Sweat rates vary between
individuals and conditions. Research
conducted among workers performing
‘‘moderate manual labor e.g., mining or
construction work’’ in a controlled
laboratory setting (35 °C and 50% RH)
demonstrated an average sweat rate of
410–470 mL per hour (depending on
whether the trial was conducted in
winter or summer), but a range of 100
mL to 1 liter per hour during the
presumed unacclimatized trials
(conducted in winter) (Bates and Miller,
2008). These recommendations are also
in line with the Army’s fluid
replacement guidelines, which
recommend 0.75–1 quart (1 quart is
approximately 0.95 liters) per hour for
‘‘moderate work’’ (425 W) to ‘‘heavy
work’’ (600 W) depending on the wet
bulb globe temperature (Department of
the Army, April 12, 2022; Table 3–2).
In a randomized crossover study,
Pryor et al. (2023) had participants
continuously walk for two hours at 6.4
km/hr in a heat chamber (34 °C/93.2 °F,
30% relative humidity) while either
drinking 500 mL of water every 40
minutes or 237 mL of water every 20
minutes, followed by two hours of rest.
Study authors found both hydration
strategies to be similarly effective based
on (1) no significant differences in body
mass, percent change in plasma volume,
plasma osmolality (i.e., volume of
particles dissolved in plasma), body
temperature, or heart rate and (2) no
difference in thirst or total
gastrointestinal symptom scores. The
authors did note, however, that urine
volume was significantly lower after the
rest period in the group receiving 237
mL of water every 20 minutes compared
to the group receiving 500 mL of water
every 40 minutes.
Several studies have evaluated the
impact of the temperature of drinking
water on dehydration and other
measures in occupational settings. Cold
water may serve as a heat sink to cool
off the body in addition to combatting
dehydration. In their meta-analysis,
Morris et al. (2020) (described above)
considered the effect of cold fluid
ingestion as a personal cooling method,
distinct from maintaining hydration
status. Morris and co-authors concluded
that cold fluid ingestion was effective as
a heat strain mitigation control.
A systematic review by Burdon et al.
reported that palatability was higher for
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70758
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
cold (32.0–50.0 °F) or cool (50.0–71.6 °F)
beverages, as compared to warmer
(greater than 71.6 °F) beverages, during
exercise (Burdon et al., 2012). The
authors conducted a meta-analysis using
data from five studies and found that
participants drank roughly 50% more
cold/cool beverages than warmer
beverages. Another analysis of multiple
studies found that when participants
were provided cold/cool beverages
rather than warmer ones, there was less
of a mismatch between fluid intake and
fluid lost through sweat (measured as
percentage of body mass lost).
Participants provided warmer beverages
lost, on average, 1.3% more of their
body mass (95% CI: 0.9%, 1.6%)
(Burdon et al., 2012).
I. Conclusions for Water
In conclusion, one experimental study
reported that drinking adequate
amounts of water while exercising in
high heat prolonged the time of
exposure before experiencing signs of
heat strain or HRI (McLellan and
Selkirk, 2006). In addition, studies in
which participants were not exposed to
high temperatures found that drinking
adequate amounts of water reduced the
risk of laboratory-induced presyncope
(Schroeder et al., 2002), and drinking
cool water improved cardiovascular
function (Parsons et al., 2023). Studies
have also reported increased palatability
for cool or cold beverages (≤71.6 °F) that
is likely to increase consumption and
prevent dehydration compared to
warmer beverages (Burdon et al., 2012).
Based on these studies, OSHA
preliminarily finds that drinking
adequate amounts of water is an
effective intervention for preventing
heat strain that could lead to HRI, and
that providing cool drinking water is
especially beneficial. In addition,
because cool or cold water was found to
be more palatable than warm water,
OSHA preliminarily finds that
providing cool or cold water can lead to
higher consumption of water and
thereby reduce the risk of dehydration.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
E. Acclimatization
Heat acclimatization refers to the
improvement in heat tolerance that
occurs from gradually increasing the
intensity and/or duration of work done
in a hot setting. There are several
studies examining the extent and
effectiveness of acclimatization
achieved on the job. The effects of
acclimatization in allowing individuals
to work safely in higher temperatures
than unacclimatized individuals has
been established for decades and is
reflected by both the NIOSH REL and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the ACGIH TLV (NIOSH, 2016; ACGIH,
2023).
Early research on the effectiveness of
acclimatization was conducted in the
1950s and 1960s among gold mine
workers in South Africa (Weiner, 1950;
Wyndham et al., 1954, 1966). Weiner
(1950) conducted three days of heat
stress tests on eight acclimatized mine
workers, with three to six months
experience working underground, and
eight new, unacclimatized workers.
Workers completed a four-hour protocol
of step climbing sessions (30 mins) with
sitting breaks (30 mins) in a mine shaft
(dry bulb temperatures: 89.8 °F–90.2 °F,
wet bulb temperatures: 88.8 °F–89.1 °F,
air movement: 165–280 ft/min).
Multiple unacclimatized workers were
not able to complete the full protocol on
the first day (based on symptomology,
heart rate and rectal temperature), while
all acclimatized workers were able to do
so. Rectal temperatures and heart rates
were higher among the unacclimatized
workers than the acclimatized workers
and sweat rate was lower (Weiner 1950).
Wyndham et al. (1954) describe a twostage acclimatization protocol in which
workers (n=110) shoveled rock for six
days in a cooler section of the mine
(saturated air temperature
approximately 86.5 °F, wind velocity
approximately 100 feet/minute), before
moving to a hot section of the mine
(saturated air temperature between
91.5 °F and 92.0 °F, wind velocity 100 to
350 feet/minute) to complete the same
task for six more days (Wyndham et al.,
1954). Researchers measured rectal
temperatures before the shift, at 9 a.m.,
at 11 a.m., and at 1 p.m. on each of the
twelve days. Average rectal temperature
was 101.0 °F on the first day in the
cooler conditions, which fell to 100.2 °F
on day six. When workers transitioned
to the hot conditions, the average rectal
temperature was 100.8 °F on the first
day and 100.0 °F on the sixth day. The
authors concluded that the
acclimatization method was a success,
as rectal temperatures were on average
lower on the first day in full heat
conditions (100.8 °F) than on the first
day of work in cooler conditions
(101.0 °F), and mean work output was
also higher on the first day in the full
heat (Wyndham et al., 1954). The
researchers also compared the
acclimatized workers to a prior cohort of
eight new workers who worked
immediately in hot conditions without
any acclimatization—they had an
average rectal temperature of 101.8 °F on
their first day. The authors noted that
the two-stage acclimatization protocol
likely resulted in complete
acclimatization, as earlier monitoring of
the eight new workers over 23 workdays
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
showed that rectal temperatures did not
fall much lower than 100 °F, the average
temperature seen after the new twophase acclimatization protocol
(Wyndham et al., 1954).
In a later study, Wyndham et al.
(1966) analyzed the rectal temperatures
of 18 acclimatized men and groups of 20
unacclimatized men working at a
moderate rate for four hours in varying
environmental conditions (Wyndham et
al., 1966). The authors found that the
acclimatized men, on average, could
work at higher effective temperatures (a
heat metric that accounts for ambient
temperature, humidity, and air
movement) than the unacclimatized
men while still maintaining a steady
rectal temperature (Wyndham et al.,
1966).
Van der Walt and Strydom analyzed
fatal heat stroke cases among miners in
South Africa from 1930–1974 (Van der
Walt and Strydom, 1975). Changes in
cooling, mechanization, and
acclimatization practices occurred at
different points in time. Van der Walt
and Strydom divided 1930–1974 into
four periods based on interventions
implemented during each period. They
discussed changes in heat stroke fatality
in relation to the interventions that were
implemented. During the earliest period
(1930–1939), acclimatization practices
were introduced and ventilation
improved, and the annual heat stroke
mortality rate decreased from 93 to 44
deaths/100,000 workers. During the
following period, which coincided with
the war and post-war time (1940–1949),
mines continued and improved the
practices introduced in the first period.
There was a drop in mortality rate from
approximately 26 to 16 deaths/100,000
workers. During the third period (1950–
1965), mines began using two-stage
acclimatization, and the annual heat
stroke mortality rate decreased from 15
to 5.6 deaths/100,000 workers. During
the fourth period (1966–1974), mines
began using climatic room
acclimatization, and the annual heat
stroke mortality rate decreased even
further to 2.3 deaths/100,000 workers
(Van der Walt and Strydom, 1975). The
authors concluded that the controls they
implemented over this period—namely
introducing and improving their
acclimatization procedures—were
important in reducing the heat stroke
fatality rates over time. However, they
also introduced other controls during
this time (ventilation and
mechanization) so it is difficult to
determine the efficacy of
acclimatization independent of those
controls (and other potential
confounding factors).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Recent research on acclimatization
has also included studies that assess
acclimatization achieved while on the
job. Lui et al. (2014) conducted a study
to evaluate acclimatization among
firefighters before and after a fourmonth wildland fire season, in May and
September, respectively. The
researchers assessed various
physiological markers of heat
acclimatization among a cohort of 12
U.S. male wildland firefighters and a
group of 14 adults who were not
firefighters, matched on age and fitness
level. Participants completed a 60minute walk at 50% of peak oxygen
consumption (VO2) in a chamber at
43.3 °C and 33% relative humidity. At
60 minutes, firefighters were found to
have lower average core body
temperatures after the wildfire season
than before the season (after: 38.2 °C ±
0.4; before: 38.5 °C ± 0.3), while the
comparison group showed no difference
from the pre-season to post-season
trials. Similarly, firefighters had
significantly lower physiological strain
index scores (a variable derived from
core temperature and heart rate) after
the wildfire season (p<0.05), while
scores did not change for the
comparison group. No pre- to postseason changes were observed for heart
rate. The authors found no evidence of
acclimatization in the comparison group
over the study period. Study results
suggest that the firefighters were
acclimatized due to occupational
exposures during the wildfire season
rather than exposure to higher seasonal
heat (Lui et al., 2014).
Dang and Dowell (2014) compared
heat strain markers among acclimatized
and unacclimatized potroom workers at
an aluminum smelter in Texas in July as
they conducted various smelting
activities in high heat. Workers were
defined as unacclimatized if they had
not been working or had been working
solely outside of the potrooms for four
or more consecutive days in the prior
two weeks. WBGT values in work areas
ranged from 83 °F to 120 °F. Among the
eight unacclimatized workers and 48–50
acclimatized workers with heat strain
measurements, unacclimatized workers
had significantly higher average heart
rates than acclimatized workers (118
bpm vs. 107 bpm, p<0.01).
Unacclimatized workers also had higher
average and average maximum core
temperatures, but these differences were
not significantly different (average
maximum core temperature: 101.0 °F vs.
100.7 °F; average core temperature:
99.7 °F vs. 99.6 °F) (Dang and Dowell,
2014).
Watkins et al. (2019) evaluated the
heat tolerance of fire service instructors
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:16 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(FSIs), which researchers describe as
fire personnel who provide firefighting
training courses and have more frequent
fire exposure than firefighters. The
researchers conducted two heat
tolerance tests, separated by two months
on a cohort of 11 FSIs and 11 unexposed
controls (university lecturers), matched
on age, sex, and body composition.
Controls had not had more than three
consecutive days of heat exposure
(<25 °C) or taken part in heat
acclimatization training in the month
prior to the study. On average, FSIs
experienced five fire exposures in the
two weeks prior to each heat tolerance
test. Each test was composed of a 10minute rest period (22.9 ± 1.2 °C, 31.2 ±
6.8% RH) followed by a 40-minute walk
in a heat chamber (50 ± 1.0 °C, 12.3 ±
3.3% RH) wearing fire protective
equipment. At the end of the first heat
tolerance test, FSIs on average had
significantly lower maximum rectal
temperature (¥0.42 °C, p<0.05), less
change in rectal temperature (¥0.33 °C,
p<0.05), and reported less thermal
sensation and, among males only, a
higher sweat rate (+0.25 Liters/hour,
p<0.05) than the controls. Heart rate,
skin temperature, and physiological
strain index did not differ between
groups. Rectal temperature at the end of
the heat test was negatively correlated
with the number of fire exposures
experienced in the prior two weeks (r=
¥0.589, p=0.004) (Watkins et al., 2019).
The effectiveness of acclimatization in
high heat conditions has also been an
important topic for militaries. Charlot et
al. (2017) studied the effects of training
on acclimatization in 60 French soldiers
who arrived in United Arab Emirates
(UAE) in May of 2016, and were not
stationed in a hot climate over the
previous year. On day 1, all soldiers
completed a heat stress test while
running. On days 2–6, the 30 soldiers in
the training group trained outdoors by
running at 50% VO2 max, with
durations of training sessions ranging
from 32–56 minutes. Both the soldiers
in the training group and 30 soldiers in
a control group (no training; performed
usual activities) spent approximately six
hours outdoors per day conducting
standard military tasks. The heat stress
test was repeated on day 7, with WBGTs
ranging from 1.1 °C warmer to 0.9 °C
cooler compared to day 1. In both
groups, rectal temperature, heart rate,
sweat loss, sweat osmolality, perceived
exertion, and thermal discomfort were
lower after the stress test on day 7
compared to day 1. Compared to the
control group, the training group had
significantly greater decreases in heart
rate (20 ± 13 bpm lower versus 13 ± 6
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70759
bpm lower), rate of perceived exertion,
and thermal discomfort after the stress
test on day 7 compared to day 1. Charlot
et al. (2017) concluded that addition of
short, moderate-intensity training
sessions resulted in further heat
acclimatization, beyond the
acclimatization observed across all
participants.
In another study of military trainees,
Lim et al. (1997) assessed the degree to
which passive heat exposure and
military training resulted in the
acclimatization of army recruits in
Singapore across a 16-week military
training program. Participants
completed a heat stress test, while
marching, at four time points: (1) before
starting the program, (2) on the second
week, (3) on the sixth week and (4) on
the sixteenth/final week of the program.
For the nine individuals who attended
all tests, heart rate significantly
decreased across the study period, while
results for skin temperature, tympanic
temperature (i.e., within ear canal), and
average body temperature were mixed,
and there were no significant
differences in sweat loss or sweat rate.
Researchers interpreted these findings
to mean that passive heat
acclimatization from living in a hot
climate had resulted in partial
acclimatization, but that physical
conditioning was necessary for
triggering beneficial cardiovascular
adaptations (Lim et al., 1997).
Sports teams have also evaluated the
effectiveness of heat acclimatization
among their athletes. Three studies
conducted among professional soccer
players found that athletes training in
hot outdoor conditions experienced
improvements in plasma volume, heart
rate, rectal and skin temperature, and/or
sweat sodium concentration over the
course of their training (Buchheit et al.,
2011; Racinais et al., 2012, 2014).
Acclimation (i.e., improvement in
heat tolerance under laboratory
conditions) was also studied in heat
chamber studies. In a study using 90minute treadmill sessions designed to
mimic the metabolic rate of manual
laborers, Chong et al. (2020) found that
over the course of a12-day
acclimatization period at 28 °C WBGT or
30 °C WBGT, peak core temperature,
heart rate, and skin temperature
decreased and sweat rate increased even
before the end of the 12-day period
(Chong et al., 2020). Zhang and Zhu
(2021) acclimated participants using 10
daily 90-minute treadmill sessions (at a
speed of 5 kilometers/hour) in 38 °C and
40% RH and found that after
acclimation, rectal temperature and
heart rate during exercise increased at a
slower rate, but there was no effect on
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70760
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
skin temperature. OSHA notes that
Zhang and Zhu (2021) did not gradually
increase daily heat exposure, as is
typically recommended.
Shvartz et al. (1977) studied the
effects of work and heat on orthostatic
tolerance among 12 trained men (i.e.,
trained three time a week in endurance
sports) and 16 untrained men, none of
whom were exposed to exercising in the
heat in the two months before testing
(Shvartz et al., 1977). The trained
participants had better orthostatic
tolerance to laboratory-induced syncope
compared to the untrained participants
(2 vs. 8 fainting episodes after exercise
in ambient conditions; 4 versus 9
fainting episodes after exercise in heat).
Heat acclimation improved orthostatic
response, as fainting episodes after
exercise decreased in the 8 untrained
participants who were later acclimated
to heat for 7 additional days (4 versus
0 fainting episodes after exercising in
temperate conditions and 4 versus 2
after exercising in hot conditions, before
and after acclimation, respectively). At
the end of the acclimation period for
those 8 untrained participants,
significant reductions were observed for
heart rate and rectal temperature, while
significant increases in sweat rate and
maximum VO2 occurred. Shvartz et al.
(1977) concluded that both general
physical fitness and heat acclimation
contributed to better orthostatic
responses and fewer fainting episodes.
Parsons et al. (2023) evaluated the
effects of heat acclimation in 20
endurance-trained athletes (15 males, 5
females) randomly assigned to a heat
group that was acclimated for 8 days or
control group that was not acclimated to
heat. Heat stress testing (at
approximately 32 °C and 71% or 72%
RH) revealed that in the postintervention period, the heat group
compared to the control group, had
significantly decreased peak heart rate;
resting, mean, and peak rectal
temperature; and peak and mean skin
temperature. No significant differences
were observed in measures of sweat and
hydration. Plasma volume was
significantly increased in the heat
compared to control group post
intervention. Orthostatic tolerance (at
approximately 32.0 °C, 20% RH)
determined by the time to laboratoryinduced presyncope, was significantly
increased in the heat group (pre: 28 ± 9
min. vs. post: 40 ± 7 min.) compared to
control group (pre: 30 ± 8 min. vs. post:
33 ± 5 min.) post-intervention. The
authors concluded that plasma volume
expansion was the likely mechanism
behind improved orthostatic tolerance;
they further noted that participants were
physically fit at baseline and that they
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
would expect a less robust acclimation
regimen would likely yield beneficial
results for populations with lower
physical fitness (Parsons et al., 2023).
I. Evidence of Tenure as a Risk Factor
Multiple investigations of
occupational HRIs have identified
tenure in the job as a risk factor.
Workers who are new on the job are
often overrepresented in HRI and heatrelated fatality reports. In many of these
cases, this apparent increased risk
presumably results from not being
acclimatized to hot working conditions.
Studies documenting tenure as a risk
factor include case series from OSHA
reports, analyses of State workers’
compensation databases, and research
on military populations. For reference,
the most recent (2023) monthly
estimates of new hires in the U.S.
suggest that over the summer months
(June to September), the percent of
workers who have been in their job for
a month or less ranges from 3.7%–4.1%
(BLS JOLTS 2023). Therefore, the
percent of workers who are in their first
day, first week, or first two weeks on the
job would be expected to be lower than
3.7%–4.1%.
Several reports have evaluated OSHA
enforcement cases of HRI and heatrelated fatalities. Arbury et al. identified
20 citations involving indoor or outdoor
HRIs and fatalities cited under the
general duty clause in 2012 and 2013
(Arbury et al., 2014). Of the 13 fatalities,
4 (31%) occurred on the worker’s first
day on the job or after returning from
time away, while 9 (69%) occurred in
the first three days of the worker’s
tenure on the job. Arbury et al.
expanded this work in a follow-on
report that included all of OSHA’s heat
enforcement cases in both indoor and
outdoor workplaces between 2012 and
2013 (n=84). Of the 23 cases involving
a heat-related fatality, 17 (74%)
occurred in the worker’s first three days
on the job and 8 (35%) on the worker’s
first day (Arbury et al., 2016). Tustin et
al. (2018a) identified 66 HRI cases
among OSHA enforcement
investigations conducted between 2011
and 2016 for which OSHA’s Office of
Occupational Medicine and Nursing
(OOMN) was consulted. Among the
fatality cases with job tenure
information (n=22), 45.5% occurred on
the first day of or returning to the job
and 72.8% occurred during the first
week. Among the non-fatal HRI cases
with job tenure information (n=32),
3.1% occurred on the first day and
18.7% occurred during the first week. In
a related analysis focusing on outdoor
workers, Tustin et al. (2018b) evaluated
25 outdoor occupational HRI and
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
fatalities investigated by OSHA between
2011 and 2016. Eleven (78.6%) of the 14
fatalities and one of the 11 non-fatal
illnesses (9.1%) occurred in workers
who had started the job within the
preceding two weeks or returned from
an absence of greater than one week
(Tustin et al., 2018b).
Arbury et al. 2014, Arbury et al. 2016,
Tustin et al. 2018a, and Tustin et al.
2018b are all retrospective case series
that used OSHA databases to identify
cases of HRI and heat-related fatalities.
As such, they rely on previously
collected information about working
conditions and worker characteristics,
which may not be complete or reflect all
factors. In addition, there may be
selection bias introduced by the type of
cases referred to OSHA’s OOMN for
review (i.e., they may represent more
severe cases).
Several studies and reports have used
data from California to describe
characteristics of occupational HRI and
heat-related fatalities in the State. From
May through November of 2005, there
were 25 heat-related Cal/OSHA
enforcement investigations (Prudhomme
and Neidhardt, 2006). When combining
fatal and non-fatal outcomes, most
workers (80%) had been on the job for
four or fewer days before their HRI
event, and almost half (46%) occurred
on the workers’ first day on the job
(Prudhomme and Neidhardt, 2006). In
2006, Cal/OSHA confirmed 46 cases of
HRI in their 38 investigations of heatrelated allegations (4 investigations
involved more than 1 case) (Prudhomme
and Neidhardt, 2007). 15% of the HRI
events and fatalities occurred on the
first day of work or the first day of a
heat wave, while 30% occurred after
working one to four days on the job or
into a heat wave (Prudhomme and
Neidhardt, 2007). It should be noted
that both Cal/OSHA reports only
capture cases investigated by Cal/
OSHA, and as such, may reflect more
severe cases of HRI. They are also not
expected to be exhaustive of all
occupational HRIs occurring in the State
during these time periods. Heinzerling
et al. (2020) investigated occupational
HRIs across industry sectors in
California from 2000 to 2017 using the
California Workers’ Compensation
Information System (Heinzerling et al.,
2020) and identified 15,996 cases of
occupational HRI. The authors reported
that 1,427 cases (8.9%) occurred within
two weeks of hire and 410 (2.6%)
occurred on the first day on the job.
Several analyses of Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries
(WA L&I) data have also investigated job
tenure in relation to heat-related
workers’ compensation claims. Bonauto
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
et al. identified 308 claims between
1995 and 2005 with information on
employment duration, 43 (14%) of
which reported job tenure of one week
or less (Bonauto et al., 2007). In
comparison, across all claims (i.e., not
just heat-related) with employment
duration information during the same
period, 3.3% of claims reported a job
tenure of one week or less, suggesting
that this pattern is more common among
heat-related claims. A more recent
analysis by WA L&I reports the percent
of accepted HRI claims occurring during
the first one and two weeks of work in
Washington between 2006 and 2021
(SHARP 2022). Across all industries,
12.5% of accepted HRI claims were filed
in the first week at a job and 16.1% of
accepted HRI claims occurred during
the first two weeks of work. The
percentage of HRI claims filed in the
first week and first two weeks of
working at a job was higher than the
percentage among all workers’
compensation claims filed in the first
week (2.2%) or two weeks (3.7%) on a
job. Spector et al. conducted an analysis
similar to Bonauto et al. 2007, but
restricted to the agriculture and forestry
sectors and included claims through
2009 (Spector et al., 2014). The
researchers identified 84 HRI claims in
the agriculture and forestry sectors,
approximately 15% of which reported
that claimants had been working at their
job for less than two weeks at the time
of the injury. As discussed in Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, occupational
HRIs, particularly those not requiring
medical treatment, are subject to
underreporting in workers’
compensation systems. Therefore,
injuries and illnesses that are captured
are likely to be more severe cases.
The U.S. military has also studied
HRIs among its recruits extensively.
Among all U.S. Marine recruits entering
basic training at the Marine Corps
Recruit Depot, Parris Island in South
Carolina between 1988 and 1996, the
number of HRI cases were higher in
early training periods (processing week
and weeks 1–4) compared to late
training period (training weeks 5–12) for
females but were similar for males
(Wallace 2003). Among males, weeks 1,
8, and 9 of training had the highest
numbers of HRI cases. Physical intensity
of training varied each week during the
12 weeks of training, which likely had
an impact on rates of HRI. Dellinger et
al. reported on HRIs among more than
7,000 Army National Guard soldiers
deployed to Illinois from July 5th to
August 18th, 1993, in response to severe
flooding (Dellinger et al., 1996).
Researchers identified 23 heat-related
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
medical claims, which excluded those
treated by on-site first aid. 65% of the
23 HRI claims occurred during the first
two weeks of the deployment;
researchers note that this was also the
period of greatest work intensity.
II. Conclusions for Acclimatization
In conclusion, numerous studies have
reported the benefits of heat
acclimatization for employees in
workplace settings. For example,
adoption of workplace acclimatization
protocols was followed by reduced rates
of heat stroke-related fatalities in South
African miners (Van der Walt and
Strydom, 1975). Acclimatization was
also reported to result in reduced signs
of heat strain or improved physiological
responses to heat for miners (Weiner,
1950; Wyndham et al., 1966), fire
fighters (Lui et al., 2014; Watkins et al.,
2019) and aluminum smelter potroom
workers (Dang and Dowell, 2014).
Similarly, studies in military personnel
have reported responses to heat
following physical training in hot
climates (Charlot et al., 2017; Lim et al.,
1997). Improvements in physiological
responses to heat were also observed in
athletes after training in hot climates
(Buchheit et al., 2011; Racinais et al.,
2012, 2014) and participants exercising
in heat chambers (Chong et al., 2020;
Zhang and Zhu, 2021). Studies have
also shown that heat acclimation while
exercising reduces the risk of laboratoryinduced syncope (Shvartz et al., 1977)
or presyncope (Parsons et al., 2023).
Additionally, retrospective
examination of limited data from State
and Federal enforcement and
surveillance cases demonstrates overrepresentation of workers during the
first days or weeks of employment or
return to work among HRI cases and
fatalities (Arbury et al., 2014, 2016;
Tustin et al., 2018a, b; Prudhomme and
Neidhardt, 2006, 2007; Heinzerling et
al., 2020; Bonauto et al., 2007; SHARP,
2022). This suggests that these workers
are at increased risk of HRI and fatality,
which may be (or at least in part) the
result of lack of acclimatization.
Based on the evidence presented in
this section, OSHA preliminarily finds
acclimatization to be an effective
intervention in reducing the risk of HRI
and heat-related fatality by improving
physiological responses to heat.
IV. Evidence on the Effectiveness of
Multicomponent Interventions
A. Civilian Workers
OSHA identified a small number of
studies that examined the effectiveness
of multi-pronged interventions
implemented at workplaces. Three
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70761
evaluated the effectiveness of a multipronged intervention at reducing the
risk of heat-related illness (McCarthy et
al., 2019; Perkison et al., 2024) or selfreported symptoms of heat-related
illness (Bodin et al., 2016) by comparing
the same study population before and
after an intervention was implemented.
OSHA does note that the studies lacked
a control group which received no
intervention and would have allowed
for the authors to examine the effect of
potential temporal confounders that
changed across the study period. In
addition, there was no data to indicate
how thoroughly the interventions were
implemented or how much employees
adhered to them. However, the studies
provide strong and consistent evidence
of the effectiveness of multiintervention programs in preventing
heat-related illnesses and are supported
on a mechanistic basis by the laboratory
and other experimental evidence
presented above.
McCarthy et al. (2019) compared HRI
events and costs from workers’
compensation data before and after a
Heat Stress Awareness Program (HSAP)
intervention among workers in a midsized city in Central Texas that was
implemented in March 2011. The study
population consisted of municipal
workers whose jobs involved work in
hot, humid conditions with moderate to
heavy physical demands, excluding
firefighters. The HSAP was based on
NIOSH’s Criteria for a Recommended
Standard: Occupational Exposure to
Heat and Hot Environments (2016) and
included in-person training of
supervisors and workers, a medical
monitoring program, and specific
recommendations to supervisors such as
providing unlimited access to water,
sports drinks, and shade, as well as
establishing acclimatization schedules,
work-rest procedures, and first aid
protocols. Before the intervention,
workers completed a self-administered
questionnaire to determine their level of
HRI risk, which the researchers then
used to categorize them into four risk
levels (McCarthy et al., 2019). Those
who reported two or more HRI risk
factors (i.e., high body mass index,
medication use, chronic illnesses,
alcohol and energy drink use, history of
prior HRI, work in a second hot job, and
extensive skin pathology) but not an
‘‘unstable health condition’’ received
individualized HRI prevention
counseling or education.
McCarthy et al. (2019) compared the
rates of heat-related illness across the
study period of 2009–2017, before and
after the HSAP intervention was
implemented in 2011. In the preintervention period (2009–2010), the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70762
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
annual average claim rate for heatrelated illnesses was 25.5 claims/1,000
workers. The average annual rate of HRI
claims in fell by 37% in 2012–2014 (16
claims/1,000 workers) and by 96% in
2015–2017 (1 claim/1,000 workers)
compared to the pre-intervention
period. No workers’ compensation
claims for HRI were submitted in the
final 2 years of the study period.
OSHA observes the potential for
healthy worker selection bias in this
study that might have occurred if
employees with medical conditions
were more likely to leave their job and
therefore the cohort during the study
period.
Perkison et al. (2024) reported that the
program in the central Texas
Municipality employees (referred to in
this study as the heat illness prevention
program (HIPP)) and described by
McCarthy et al. 2019) ended in 2017 and
was replaced by a modified HIPP
(mHIPP) that included only employee
and supervisor training and employee
acclimatization. In an analysis to
determine the impact of dropping
medical surveillance from the HIPP, the
study authors reported that the rate of
heat illness and injury, which averaged
19.5/1,000 employees during the first
four years of the HIPP (2011–2014), fell
to 1.0/1,000 employees over the next
three years (2015–2017), but increased
to 7.6 per 1,000 workers during the
mHIPP (2018–2019). Although heatrelated illness claim rates increased
during implementation of the mHIPP,
the rate of heat-related illness during
implementation of the mHIPP (7.6/
1,000) was still 70% lower than the
period with no intervention (25.5/
1,000).
Bodin et al. (2016) reported on
productivity, HRI symptoms, and
hydration practices before and after a
water-rest-shade (WRS) and efficiency
intervention among sugarcane cutters in
El Salvador. The intervention began two
months into the 5-month harvest season
of 2014–2015. The WRS intervention
included: 3-liter water bladders carried
in backpacks and refilled during breaks;
an initial 1.5 to 2-hour work interval
followed by a 10 to 15-minute break,
then hour-long work periods with 10 to
15-minute rest breaks and a 45-minute
lunch break; and a portable shade
canopy for breaks. The efficiency
intervention consisted of a machete
with an improved blade and handle,
fewer rows cut, and a stacking method
to reduce workload. Due to challenges
during data collection, a relatively small
sample size of 41 workers completed
follow-up. Bodin et al. (2016) reported
that, among those 41 sugarcane cutters,
average daily water intake (5.1 liters
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
pre-intervention, 6.3 liters postintervention) and average daily
production (5.1 tons pre, 7.3 tons post)
increased after the intervention. An
analysis of self-reported heat stress and
dehydration-associated symptoms
showed that reporting of most
symptoms decreased after the
intervention, such as feeling feverish
(40% to 10%), exhaustion (37% to
14%), nausea (35% to 12%), very dry
mouth (49% to 26%), very little urine
(37% to 19%), cramps (30% to 17%),
diarrhea (14% to 0%), disorientation
(12% to 0%), and fainting (5% to 2%).
However, self-reported rates of vomiting
(9% to 10%) and dysuria (i.e., pain
during urination) (42% to 45%)
remained similar in pre- and postintervention periods (Bodin et al., 2016)
(Communication with David Wegman,
November 2023).
B. Military Personnel
OSHA also identified studies which
examined the effectiveness of
interventions in reducing risk of heatrelated illness among military
personnel. OSHA acknowledges
differences between military personnel
and typical civilian worker populations,
such as health status, fitness levels, and
the types of physical activities
performed by military personnel (e.g.,
long-distance running). The military
also employs certain controls that aren’t
typically used in workplaces, such as
work stoppage criteria. However, OSHA
finds the studies in military personnel
useful for showing that multicomponent interventions can reduce the
risk of heat-related illness.
Kerstein et al. (1986) conducted a
randomized control trial in military
reservists exposed to hot and humid
conditions and found that the incidence
of heat illness was 54% lower in a group
exposed to intervention measures.
Those measures included a lecture on
water as prevention, training on and use
of portable WBGT monitors, and a
special briefing for Commanding
Officers. Incidence rates of HRI (defined
as ‘‘any person with heat symptoms,
including exhaustion, cramps, and
headaches that the corpsman could
clearly relate to the environment and
cause the individual to be nonfunctional for at least one hour or
more’’) were 13 out of 306 participants
in the intervention group (4.2%) and 20
out of 220 in the control group (9.1%).
Stonehill and Keil examined the
number of heat stroke cases at Lackland
Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas
after they implemented a series of
interventions over a period from 1956
through 1959 (Stonehill and Keil, 1961).
Interventions that were implemented
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
before 1958 included education on heat
illness and prevention, pausing training
based on dry bulb temperatures, shifting
harder exercises to cooler hours, treating
heat rash, providing clothing with better
ventilation, improving personal
hygiene, providing special advice for
overweight individuals, and
implementing immediate medical
treatment for heat stroke. Despite these
measures, they still observed 39 cases of
heat stroke in 1957 (a rate of 0.87/
1,000). After making improvements to
their prevention measures in the
summer of 1958 (increased water and
salt tablet availability, removing fatigue
shirts inside classrooms, using WBGT to
determine when to pause training, and
avoiding intense outdoor training in the
first week of training), they observed
only 2 heat stroke cases that summer (a
rate of 0.05/1,000), a reduction of 95%
from 1957.
Minard (1961) evaluated the
effectiveness of interventions in
reducing HRIs in a study of the Marine
Corps Recruit Depot in Parris Island,
South Carolina. During the summer of
1952, the mean weakly HRI incidence
rate was 53 per 10,000 recruits. A
program to address HRI was adopted in
1954 and later modified in 1956. Minard
reported a lower mean weekly HRI rate
with the enhanced interventions in 1956
(4.7 per 10,000 recruits) compared to the
initial intervention in 1955 (12.4 per
10,000 recruits), despite higher
temperatures in 1956. Initial
interventions included curtailing
physical activity during high heat and
numerous behavioral changes, such as
modifications to uniforms and
leadership training; while the most
substantial changes to enhance the
interventions included curtailing
physical activity based on WBGT and
differentiating physical activity
guidance for acclimatized versus
unacclimatized recruits. Later
enhancements to the intervention
included conditioning recruits with
substandard fitness, shade for outdoor
classrooms, cooling for indoor
classrooms, modification of the clothing
policy to allow for only t-shirts, light
duty status for recently vaccinated
recruits, one hour rest or classroom
instruction after meals, better
ventilation in barracks to improve sleep,
and strategies to increase water and salt
intake. The mean weekly HRI rate for all
summers with the enhanced
intervention (1956–1960) was 4.3 per
10,000 recruits. Four fatalities from heat
stroke occurred from 1951 to 1953, but
no fatalities occurred since 1953.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
C. Conclusions for Multicomponent
Interventions in Civilian and Military
Employees
In conclusion, three studies in
civilian worker populations found that
multicomponent heat stress
interventions reduced the incidence of
HRI claims and self-reported heat strain
and dehydration symptoms and
increased work output. The findings of
these studies are supported by studies
among military personnel, which also
found multicomponent interventions to
be effective in reducing incidence of
70763
HRI, as well as data on the effectiveness
of individual control measures reported
in laboratory and experimental studies,
which are summarized above. The
findings of these multicomponent
intervention studies are summarized in
table V–3.
TABLE V–3—SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MULTICOMPONENT INTERVENTIONS IN REDUCING HRIS
AND HEAT-RELATED SYMPTOMS
Evidence
Notes
Multi-component Interventions
McCarthy et al. (2019): In a comparison of heat-related illness claims
before and after the implementation of a heat stress awareness program that began in 2011 in a Texas municipality, the average annual
rate of HRI claims fell [by 37%] in 2012–2014 (16 claims/1,000 workers) and [by 96%] in 2015–2017 (1 claim/1,000 workers) compared
to the pre-intervention period (25.5 claims/1,000 workers).
Perkison et al. (2024). The program in Texas municipality workers reported by McCarthy et al. (2019) was modified in 2017 to include
only training and acclimatization, and no longer include medical surveillance. Rate of heat-related illness did increase after these
changes (to 7.6 claims/1,000 workers) but remained [70%] lower
than when no program was implemented.
Bodin et al. (2016) reported that three months after implementation of
interventions, self-reported heat stress and dehydration-associated
symptoms decreased as follows: feeling feverish (40% to 10%
[↓76%]), exhaustion (37% to 14% [↓62%]), nausea (35% to 12%
[↓66%]), very dry mouth (49% to 26% [↓46%]), very little urine (37%
to 19% [↓ 49%]), cramps (30% to 17% [↓45%]), diarrhea (14% to 0%
[↓100%]), disorientation (12% to 0% [↓100%]), and fainting (4.7% to
2.4% [49%]) Rates of vomiting and dysuria were similar.
Kerstein et al. (1986) reported a [54%] decrease in heat illnesses in
military reservists after an intervention.
Stonehill and Keil (1961) reported the number of heat stroke cases and
the number of troops in the summers of 1957 and 1958, before and
after additional protective measures were implemented.
• The heat stroke rate in summer 1958 after implementing additional protective measures was [95%] lower [0.05/1,000 troops]
than the summer before [0.87/1,000 troops].
Minard (1961) study of military recruits:
• The rate of HRI after implementation of the program (12.4/
10,000 recruits) was [77%] lower than before the program was
implemented (53/10,000) recruits.
• The rate of HRI after enhanced interventions (4.7 per 10,000 recruits) was [62%] lower than the rate after initial interventions
(12.4 per 10,000 recruits) and [91%] lower than the period before the program (53/10,000).
• The program involved medical monitoring and training.
• Recommendations made to supervisors included unlimited access to
water, sports drinks, and shade, as well as establishing acclimatization schedules, work/rest procedures, and first aid protocols.
• It is not known if and to what extent recommendations were implemented.
• The study authors concluded ‘‘medical surveillance may be an important component in lowering workforce heat-related illness,’’ but
noted the small sample size and short evaluation period.
• Most of the interventions were consistent with the main interventions
of the proposed standard (i.e., providing drinking water, and shaded
rest breaks and a lunch break).
• Ergonomic improvements were also implemented.
• Non-U.S. workers (El Salvador) in sugar cane industry.
• Military study.
• Intervention: A lecture on water as prevention, training on and use of
portable WBGT monitors, and a special briefing for Commanding Officers.
• Military study.
• Intervention being tested: In addition to existing prevention measures, they added increased water and salt tablet availability, removing fatigue shirts inside classrooms, using WBGT to determine when
to pause training, and avoiding intense outdoor training in the first
week of training.
• Military study.
• Examples of intervention measures: curtailing physical activity during
high heat, modifications to uniforms, leadership training, curtailing
physical activity based on WBGT, differentiating physical activity
guidance for acclimatized versus unacclimatized recruits, conditioning recruits with substandard fitness, shade for outdoor classrooms, cooling for indoor classrooms, modification of the clothing
policy to allow for only t-shirts, light duty status for recently vaccinated recruits, one hour rest or classroom instruction after meals,
better ventilation in barracks to improve sleep, and strategies to increase water and salt intake.
Numbers in brackets calculated and rounded by OSHA.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
V. Governmental and NonGovernmental Organizations’
Requirements and Recommendations
A number of governmental and nongovernmental organizations recommend
or require heat injury and illness
prevention programs or multiple
controls to address risks related to
occupational heat exposure. This shows
that OSHA’s proposal continues to
reflect the growing consensus that HRIs
can be avoided or minimized when
employers address conditions that have
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
been shown to increase the risk of HRI.
OSHA’s proposal also continues to
reflect a consensus that, to be most
effective, an HRI prevention program
should incorporate multiple
interventions.
A. Governmental Requirements and
Recommendations
As of April 2024, five States had heat
injury and illness prevention standards,
reflecting a recognition by these States
that certain measures can reduce heat-
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
related risks posed to workers. These
standards have many of the same types
of controls OSHA is proposing (e.g., a
written heat safety plan, emergency
response protocols, rest breaks, training
on HRI recognition and prevention). For
a more detailed discussion of existing
State standards see Section III.,
Background. In addition, numerous
States have published heat illness and
injury prevention guidance for workers.
NIOSH has issued a number of
guidance products and provided expert
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70764
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
advice on heat injury and illness
prevention and developed a
programmatic approach to reduce the
risks associated with heat for workers.
For example, in 2016, NIOSH updated
its Criteria for a Recommended
Standard: Occupational Exposure to
Heat and Hot Environments, first
published in 1972 and updated in 1986,
stating, ‘‘compliance with this
recommended standard should prevent
or greatly reduce the risk of adverse
health effects to exposed workers.’’
NIOSH recommends that employers
‘‘establish and implement a written
program to reduce exposures to or
below the applicable RAL or REL’’
(which considers exposure to
environmental heat and metabolic heat
(i.e., work intensity) for unacclimatized
and acclimatized employees,
respectively) with engineering and work
practice controls. Examples of
engineering controls include ventilation
to increase air movement, airconditioning, screening, and insulation.
Examples of administrative controls
include rest breaks to decrease exposure
time and metabolic heat loads,
increasing distance from radiant
sources, and implementing
acclimatization protocols, health and
safety training, medical screening for
heat intolerance, and a heat alert
program. If engineering and
administrative controls do not reduce
exposure below the applicable RAL or
REL, NIOSH also recommends cooling
clothing/PPE. NIOSH states, ‘‘the
reduction of adverse health effects can
be accomplished by the proper
application of engineering and work
practice controls, worker training and
acclimatization, measurements and
assessment of heat stress, medical
monitoring, and proper use of heatprotective clothing and personal
protective equipment (PPE)’’ (NIOSH,
2016).
In another example of NIOSH
guidance, NIOSH investigated a number
of heat-related workplace fatalities to
assess the hazards and propose
recommendations for preventing similar
fatalities, as part of the Fatality
Assessment and Control Evaluation
(FACE) Program. In four heat fatality
investigations that affected landscapers
(NIOSH, 2015), farm workers (NIOSH,
2007), firefighters (NIOSH, 1997), and
construction laborers (NIOSH, 2004),
collective recommendations related to
heat included: development,
implementation and training on a safety
and health program that is made
available to all workers; providing rest
breaks and accessible hydration;
training workers and supervisors on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
recognizing HRI; providing prompt
medical assistance for HRI; monitoring
of worker symptoms by supervisors;
implementing acclimatization programs;
informing workers of drinks (e.g.,
alcoholic) that can increase risk; having
medical providers inform workers
taking certain drugs or with certain
medical conditions of their increased
risk; and factoring in clothing and
weather to determine firefighter
workloads.
Additionally, there is a recognition
amongst other Federal regulatory
agencies that employers can implement
control measures to reduce heat-related
risks and harms. The Mine Safety and
Health Administration (MSHA) first
published heat guidance for mines in
1976, and most recently published
‘‘Heat Stress in Mining’’ which provides
guidance on reducing heat stress
(MSHA, 2012). The report states that a
combination of engineering controls,
administrative controls and work
practices, and PPE can reduce heat and
prevent employee’s core temperatures
from rising. MSHA recommendations
include mine planning to provide cool
rest areas, implementing exhaust
ventilation and air-conditioning in
mines, using canopies in the sun, using
skillful blasting procedures to reduce
excessive heat, using automation/remote
controls to reduce metabolic heat,
implementing work-rest regimens with
frequent breaks, pacing work tasks,
performing heavy tasks in cooler areas
or at cooler times, rotating personnel
through hot work tasks, providing
readily accessible, cooler rest areas and
drinking water, acclimatizing new and
returning employees, and ensuring
employees and supervisors are
knowledgeable about heat related topics
such as risk, prevention, and symptoms.
In 1993, the EPA published ‘‘A Guide
to Heat Stress Management in
Agriculture’’ to ‘‘help private and
commercial applicators and agricultural
employers protect their workers from
heat illness’’ (EPA, 1993). The guide
outlines the development of a basic
program to control heat stress which
includes: designating one person to
manage the heat stress program; training
workers and supervisors on heat illness
prevention; acclimatizing workers when
they begin to work under hot
conditions; evaluating weather
conditions, workload, necessary
protective equipment or garments, and
the physical condition of the employee;
managing work activities by setting up
rest breaks, rotating tasks among
workers, and scheduling heavy work for
cooler hours; establishing a drinking
water program; taking additional
measures such as providing special
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
cooling garments, shade or airconditioned mobile equipment; and
giving first aid when workers become ill
(EPA, 1993).
In 2023, the U.S. Army updated its
Training and Doctrine Command
(TRADOC) Army Regulation 350–29
which ‘‘prescribes policy and provides
guidance to commanders in preventing
environmental (heat or cold)
casualties.’’ It includes requirements for
rest in shade and water consumption
according to specific WBGT levels and
work intensity, and consideration of
heat stress when planning training
events (Department of the Army, June
15, 2023). In 2022, the U.S. Department
of the Army issued the technical heat
stress bulletin ‘‘TB MED 507: Heat
Stress Control and Casualty
Management’’ that contains measures to
prevent indoor and outdoor HRIs in
soldiers, with recommendations for
acclimatization planning, work-rest
cycles, fluid and electrolyte
replacement, and cooling methods (e.g.,
shade, fans for prevention, and iced
sheets and ice water immersion for
treatment) (Department of the Army,
April 12, 2022).
The U.S. Department of the Navy has
published additional guidance on heat
injury and illness prevention particular
to naval conditions (Department of the
Navy, 2023). When Navy personnel are
‘‘afloat’’, they use Physiological Heat
Exposure Limits (PHEL) curves to
manage heat stress based on exposure
limits/stay times for acclimatized
personnel under various conditions of
environmental heat and work intensity.
The PHEL curves were designed to
allow core body temperature to rise to
102.2 °F (39 °C) among healthy and
acclimatized individuals who have
rested and recovered from prior heat
exposures.
In 2023, the Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group of the National
Advisory Committee on Occupational
Safety and Health (NACOSH) presented
to OSHA recommendations on potential
elements of a proposed heat injury and
illness prevention standard. The Work
Group recommended that OSHA
include the following measures in a
potential standard: a written exposure
control plan (heat illness prevention
plan); training on heat illness
prevention; environmental monitoring;
provision of water, breaks, and shade or
cool-down areas; other administrative
controls (e.g., rotating workers through
work tasks and implementing a
communication system for regular
check-ins); other engineering control
measures (e.g., ventilation, exhaust fans,
and portable cool-down mechanisms
including fans, tents, shielding/
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
insulation, proactive misting);
workplace practice controls (e.g.,
providing coolers with ice and
scheduling work during the coolest part
of day); personal protective equipment;
acclimatization procedures; worker
participation in planning activities; and
emergency response procedures
(NACOSH, May 31, 2023).
B. National Non-Governmental
Organizations
ACGIH first recommended a standard
for heat stress in 1971 (ACGIH, 2021),
and most recently updated it in 2023
(ACGIH, 2023). The TLV is a value that
is determined with the goal of
maintaining thermal equilibrium for
healthy acclimatized employees and is
based on WBGT adjusted for work
intensity and clothing/PPE. An action
limit (AL) considers those same factors
for unacclimatized employees. ACGIH
recommends that whenever heat stress
among workers is suspected (based on
factors such as environmental
conditions, work demands, work-rest
patterns, and acclimatization states),
employers have a Heat Stress
Management Program (HSMP) that
includes written plans for ‘‘General
Controls’’ and as appropriate, ‘‘Job
Specific Controls’’ (Table 5 of the Heat
Stress and Strain section of the TLV
Booklet). ACGIH states ‘‘The principal
objective of a HSMP is the prevention of
excessive heat strain among workers
that may result in heat-related
disorders.’’ General controls include
environmental surveillance, medical
clearance and counseling by a
healthcare provider, training,
acclimatization planning, fluid
replacement, symptom monitoring,
breaks in the shade, and an emergency
response plan. Job specific controls
include engineering controls (e.g., air
movement, shade, radiant heat shields),
administrative controls (e.g., limiting
exposure time and allowing for enough
recovery time), personal cooling, and
physiological monitoring.
In 2024, the American National
Standards Institute/American Society of
Safety Professionals A10 Committee
(ANSI/ASSP) released the American
National Standard A10.50 Standard for
Heat Stress Management in
Construction and Demolition
Operations. The voluntary consensus
standard ‘‘establishes procedures for the
management of heat stress hazards and
the selection and use of appropriate
controls and practices to reduce risks
presented by heat stress and prevention
of heat illnesses for all work
environments.’’ The standard
recommends that employers develop
and implement the following: heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
stress management program;
acclimatization plan; workplace
surveillance/risk assessment; provision
of water and sodium electrolyte
supplements; provision of rest breaks
and shaded break locations; buddy
system; first aid and emergency action
plan; medical surveillance; employee
participation; implementation of heat
stress controls including engineering
controls such as air-conditioning,
radiant heat control (barrier), convection
controls (cooling), evaporative controls
such as misting fans, and metabolic
controls (e.g., mechanical equipment or
tools to reduce metabolic demands of
work tasks); administrative controls
such as scheduling for cooler times and
allowing self-paced work; personal
protective equipment; and training on
heat illness prevention (ANSI/ASSP,
2024). More specific recommendations
(e.g., frequency of rest breaks;
monitoring employees) are provided
when certain triggers are exceeded.
In 2021, the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) finalized
its Standard Guide for Managing Heat
Stress and Heat Strain in Foundries
(E3279–21) which establishes ‘‘best
practices for recognizing and managing
occupational heat stress and heat strain
in foundry environments.’’ The standard
outlines employer responsibilities and
recommends elements for a ‘Heat Stress
and Heat Strain Management Program.’
Employer responsibilities include
evaluating temperature and issuing heat
alerts; ensuring control measures are in
place; and reviewing heat exposure
incidents to implement corrective
actions. Program elements include
worker preparation (i.e., only assigning
workers to tasks involving heat
exposure ‘‘who are prepared for work in
those environments and can tolerate the
heat exposure associated with the
assignments’’) and workplace and work
preparation (i.e., implementing controls
that reduce heat stress through process
heat emission control and ventilation of
work areas, adjusting work schedules,
providing heat relief crews (e.g., crew
rotation), providing personal protective
equipment, employing personal and
portable cooling devices, providing
readily available water, and providing
cooled location for work break) (ASTM,
2021). The standard also recommends
employers and workers monitor heat
strain and establish emergency response
protocols.
C. Conclusion on Governmental and
Non-Governmental Recommendations
In closing, a number of governmental
and non-governmental groups have
either promulgated regulations or
published recommendations for
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70765
protecting workers from HRI. Many of
those regulations or recommendations
contain components that are consistent
with protections in the proposed rule,
including plans to prevent heat stress,
rest breaks in shaded or cooled areas,
cool drinking water, ventilation or
cooling methods (e.g., fans exhaust),
acclimatization, observation of
symptoms in workers, environmental
monitoring, and emergency response
procedures. Many of these protections
have been recognized for decades as
being effective in reducing the risk of
HRI in workers. This shows that
OSHA’s proposal continues to reflect
the growing consensus that HRIs can be
avoided or minimized when employers
address conditions that have been
shown to increase the risk of HRI and
incorporate these protections as part of
a program that is tailored to each
workplace.
VI. Conclusion
OSHA reviewed a number of studies
that provided quantitative evidence of
the effectiveness of multi-component
interventions in reducing heat-related
illness or HRI; the results of those
studies are summarized in table V–3
above. Studies among Texas
municipality employees show that a
multi-component intervention approach
reduced HRI claims by 37 to 96 percent
compared to pre-intervention levels,
depending on the period of intervention
and the types of interventions applied
(McCarthy et al., 2019; Perkison et al.,
2024). Implementation of multicomponent interventions in military
studies resulted in slightly lower
reductions in HRI from pre- to postintervention (54–95 percent), again
depending on the types of interventions
applied in different implementation
periods (Kerstein et al., 1986; Minard,
1961; Stonehill and Keil, 1961).
OSHA acknowledges that several of
the interventions implemented among
the Texas municipality employees and
military personnel differ from the
interventions in the proposed standard.
However, interventions focusing on
water, rest, and shade among sugar cane
employees in El Salvador resulted in
similar reductions for several common
(i.e., occurring in 30% or more of
employees pre-intervention) symptoms
of heat-related illness (e.g., 45%
reduction in cramps, 46% reduction in
very dry mouth, 49% reduction in very
little urine, 62% reduction for
exhaustion, 66% reduction for nausea,
76% reduction for feeling feverish)
(Bodin et al., 2016; communication with
David Wegman, November 2023).
Because of the small number of workers
completing the study (n=41), results
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70766
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
regarding less common symptoms
(reported in less than 15% of workers
pre-intervention) are more uncertain,
but Bodin et al. reported a decrease in
fainting and no incidents of diarrhea or
disorientation after the interventions
were implemented. Therefore, the study
by Bodin et al. (2016) supports the
finding that a multi-intervention
approach that includes several
interventions in common with the
proposed standard is likely to result in
substantial reductions in HRI
symptoms.
Despite several limitations that were
acknowledged for these multiintervention studies, the results for all
are of a large magnitude and
consistently show effectiveness for
multi-component interventions in
preventing HRIs. In addition, the results
are mechanistically supported by
experimental studies showing the
effectiveness of individual interventions
in preventing signs and symptoms
related to heat strain. OSHA finds the
studies looking at multi-component
approaches to be more relevant for
looking at quantitative reductions in
HRI because each individual component
would contribute to the overall effect.
In addition to studies showing
effectiveness of multi-component
interventions in preventing HRIs, two
studies also show that effective
treatments are available to prevent death
if heat stroke does occur. As reported in
more detail under the Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(g)(3), Heat illness and emergency
response and planning, studies
examining the effectiveness of treating
individuals suffering from exertional
heat stroke reported 99.8% survival in
military personnel treated with ice
sheets (bed sheets soaked in water)
(DeGroot et al., 2023) and 100% survival
in marathon runners doused with cold
water and massaged with ice bags
(McDermott et al., 2009a).
OSHA preliminarily finds that the
totality of the evidence reviewed
supports that the approach outlined in
the proposed standard, which consists
of a heat injury and illness prevention
plan and the application of multiple
control measures, will result in a
substantial reduction in HRIs (range:
37–96%) and heat-related fatalities
(range: 99.8–100%) in employees who
would be covered under the proposed
standard.
VII. Requests for Comments
For the controls proposed, OSHA
requests information and comment on
the following questions and requests
that stakeholders provide any relevant
data, information, or additional studies
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(or citations) supporting their view, and
explain the reasoning or
recommendations for including such
studies:
• OSHA recognizes that a number of
States (e.g., California, Oregon,
Washington) have implemented
standards to prevent HRIs and heatrelated fatalities among workers. OSHA
is aware that there are existing and
emerging data on the efficacy of the
State standards in preventing and
reducing HRIs and heat-related
fatalities. OSHA welcomes proposed
analytical methods or analyses of
existing data (see e.g., discussion in
V.A., Risk Assessment of existing data
sources, www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/reports/
State-OSHA-Annual-Report-(SOAR)-FY2022.pdf) or unpublished data that may
be used to estimate the effects of these
State standards on heat-related injury,
illness, and fatality rates among
workers. OSHA is also interested in
comments on how to account for the
differences (some of which are
significant) between the State standards
and OSHA’s proposed standard in
estimating efficacy of OSHA’s proposed
standard. Are there studies, data, or
other evidence that demonstrate the
efficacy of and/or describe employers’
or workers’ experiences with these heatspecific State standards?
• Has OSHA adequately identified
and documented the studies and other
information relevant to its conclusion
regarding the effectiveness of these
controls in reducing heat strain and the
risk of HRIs, and are there additional
studies OSHA should consider?
• Are there additional studies or
evidence available that identify
appropriate frequencies and durations
of rest breaks for reducing heat strain
and risk of HRIs?
• Are OSHA’s conclusions about the
effectiveness of controls in preventing
HRI reasonable?
VI. Significance of Risk
As explained in Section II., Pertinent
Legal Authority, prior to the issuance of
a new standard, OSHA must make a
threshold finding that a significant risk
of material harm exists, and that
issuance of the new standard will
substantially reduce that risk.
In Section IV., Health Effects, OSHA
presents data and information
demonstrating the range of heat-related
injuries and illnesses (HRIs) that can be
caused by occupational exposure to
heat. This discussion demonstrates that
HRIs often result in material harm, as
they are potentially disabling, can result
in lost work time, require medical
treatment or restricted work, and in
certain cases, can lead to death. In
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Section V., Risk Assessment, OSHA
presents the best available evidence on
the risk of incurring these heat-related
material health impairments among
workers in the U.S., which clearly
demonstrates that there exists a
significant risk of material harm to
workers from occupational exposure to
heat. As OSHA’s analysis of BLS data
shows, there was an average of 40 heatrelated deaths (2011–2022) and 3,389
HRIs involving days away from work
(2011–2020) among U.S. workers per
year. Additionally, based on OSHA’s
review of workers’ compensation claim
data, OSHA found that workers in
sectors and industries where they are
likely exposed to heat in their job (and
therefore are more likely to be covered
by this standard) have far higher
estimated incidence of HRI than the
national average, indicating that the risk
to heat-exposed workers is much higher
than nationwide data suggests.
Furthermore, both the annual and
working lifetime incidence rates
underestimate the true risk for heatexposed workers given underreporting
of workplace injuries and illnesses.
Thus, as explained in sections A and B
below, OSHA preliminarily determines
that a significant risk of material harm
from occupational exposure to
hazardous heat exists, and issuance of
this standard would substantially
reduce that risk.
A. Material Harm
As discussed in Section IV., Health
Effects, the risks posed by exposure to
workplace heat hazards are significant
and can result in serious HRIs or even
death. As discussed in Section IV.B.,
General Mechanisms of Heat-Related
Health Effects, heat stress can result in
increased core body temperature and
blood flow being shunted towards the
skin and away from major organs (e.g.,
brain, liver, kidneys) and muscles.
Sweating, which is a healthy and
normal response to heat stress, can also
contribute to a reduction in circulating
blood volume if fluids are not
adequately replaced. This increase in
core body temperature and reduced
blood flow can lead to health effects like
heat stroke, heat exhaustion, heat
syncope, and rhabdomyolysis. If not
treated promptly, heat stroke can cause
permanent organ damage and lead to
death. Treatment often requires
hospitalization and time away from
work (see discussion in Section IV.E.,
Heat Stroke). Other health effects, such
as heat exhaustion, may also require
time away from work if recommended
by a medical professional. Many heatrelated health effects, such as heat
cramps and heat exhaustion, can impair
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
a worker’s functional capacity while on
the job. Heat syncope can pose
additional dangers to workers if they are
in precarious work environments, such
as on rooftops or while operating
machinery. Heat exhaustion can also
rapidly progress to heat stroke if not
recognized and treated early. As
discussed in Section IV.P., Heat-Related
Injuries, heat-induced impairments in
functional capacity on the job can lead
to traumatic injuries, which are more
likely to occur on hot days.
The studies that OSHA relied on in
Section V.A., Risk Assessment leverage
data from multiple surveillance
databases (e.g., BLS SOII, workers’
compensation claims databases, and
hospital discharge data) that have
inclusion criteria that OSHA
preliminarily concludes would clearly
indicate that captured cases of HRIs
represent material impairment of health.
For example, the estimated number of
work-related HRIs reported in the BLS
SOII capture only those that involved
days away from work (Note: For 2021–
2022 biennial data, SOII additionally
reports cases involving job restriction or
transfer). Similarly, hospital discharge
datasets would represent only cases that
involved an emergency department visit
and/or inpatient hospitalization. While
workers’ compensation eligibility varies,
all of the claims would involve either a
visit with a medical professional and/or
lost worktime. HRIs resulting in lost
work time and/or the need for medical
care beyond first aid clearly constitute
material harm.
However, HRIs constituting material
harm are not limited to those rising to
the level of lost work time and/or the
need to seek care from a medical
professional. Based on the evidence
discussed in this and other sections of
this preamble, OSHA has preliminarily
concluded that many of the HRIs
associated with workplace exposure to
heat hazards constitute material harm,
even if they are not captured in the
databases OSHA relied on in its risk
assessment. OSHA recognizes that many
of these HRIs may be reversible,
particularly if early intervention is
provided. Nonetheless, OSHA presents
evidence in Section IV., Health Effects
that these HRIs can be debilitating. In
addition to lost work time and the need
for treatment by a medical professional,
HRIs can cause reduction or loss of the
worker’s normal functional capacity in
work tasks and loss of productivity.
Additionally, where preventive action
or early treatment is not provided, these
disorders can rapidly progress to more
serious conditions, and have the
potential to result in permanent damage
to organs, causing short-, medium-, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
long-term health effects, or death. Thus,
while some of the health effects OSHA
has identified may not rise to the level
of material harm in all cases, the agency
believes that each can be material in
severe cases.
B. Significant Risk
Peer-reviewed studies and State or
national statistics are available to
demonstrate the high incidence of workrelated HRIs occurring among workers
exposed to heat hazards at work.
Estimates of the risk of harm
confronting exposed workers can be
based directly on the rates of workrelated HRIs currently being reported.
In Section V.A., Risk Assessment, of
this preamble, OSHA evaluated the risk
to workers of a heat-related injury,
illness, or fatality. OSHA’s analysis of
BLS data indicated an annual average of
40 heat-related deaths (2011–2022) and
3,389 HRIs involving days away from
work (2011–2020) among U.S. workers.
These annual heat-related death and
HRI numbers alone clearly constitute a
significant risk and are in line with
OSHA’s significant risk findings in
previous safety standards (see, e.g.,
Confined Spaces in Construction, 80 FR
25366, 25371 (May 4, 2014); Electric
Power Generation, Transmission, and
Distribution; Electrical Protective
Equipment, 79 FR 20316, 20321–20322
(April 11, 2014); Cranes and Derricks in
Construction, 75 FR 47906, 47913 (Aug.
9, 2010)). However, as discussed in
Section V.A., Risk Assessment, many of
the sources that OSHA reviewed
reported HRI data in terms of incidence
rates, and OSHA has considered these
rates in assessing significant risk, to the
extent they capture populations that are
actually exposed to hazardous
occupational heat.
Unfortunately, the available data is
insufficient to precisely estimate the
risk to only workers who are exposed to
hazardous occupational heat. But by
examining incidence estimates derived
from various datasets, including State
workers’ compensation systems, OSHA
was able to determine a range of HRI
incidence rates among workplaces
where employees are likely to be
exposed to heat in their job. In Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, OSHA identified
various sector incidence estimates of
HRI over a working lifetime (i.e., 45
years), including: 234 to 1,737 cases per
100,000 workers in agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting; 63 to 545 cases per
100,000 workers in construction; 131 to
396 cases per 100,000 workers in
administrative and support and waste
management and remediation services;
49.5 to 171 cases per 100,000 workers in
transportation and warehousing; and
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70767
513 cases per 100,000 workers in
utilities, among others. The working
lifetime incident rates were even higher
in specific industries, such as an
estimated 3,479 cases of HRI per
100,000 workers for farm labor
contractors and crew leaders and 2,439
cases per 100,000 structural steel and
precast concrete workers over a working
lifetime of 45 years (see Section V. A.,
Risk Assessment, table V–1). OSHA
preliminarily concludes that these
incidence rates, though as explained
below substantially underestimate
actual risk, are the best available
evidence and sufficient to make a
finding of significant risk of HRIs among
workers who are exposed to
occupational heat.
While the data are not sufficient to
develop a single point estimate of the
risk posed to heat-exposed workers,
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that the available data from BLS and
workers’ compensation claims support
an estimate of working lifetime risk of
HRI ranging from 135 cases per 100,000
workers (calculated based on the BLS
average estimated annual incidence of
HRIs for all workers for 2011–2020) to
3,479 cases per 100,000 workers (based
on workers’ compensation claims). Even
the lowest estimate within this range
exceeds the 1/1000 threshold that
OSHA has historically found to clearly
constitute a significant risk.
As noted above, OSHA believes that
these data from BLS and workers’
compensation claims substantially
understate the true risk to workers. For
one, the inclusion criteria for the
surveillance systems used to estimate
incidence would exclude a large
proportion of HRI cases. For instance,
prior to this year, the BLS SOII only
reported the estimated number of HRIs
that involved days away from work,
which may be less than 50% of all
OSHA-recordable work-related HRIs
(see, e.g., BLS, IIF Latest Numbers for
2022, https://www.bls.gov/iif/latestnumbers.htm). Additionally, the
majority of incidence estimates
identified by OSHA are based on the
risk of HRIs confronting an entire
working population (e.g., all workers in
a particular industry or sector), both
exposed and non-exposed. Clearly, the
risk of experiencing a work-related HRI
is considerably higher among the subset
of workers exposed to heat hazards in
their jobs than it is for the rest of the
working population. For example, the
annual BLS incidence estimates are
susceptible to understating risk in this
way because when BLS calculates
annual incidence estimates, it captures
the entire U.S. workforce in the
denominator, which includes a large
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70768
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
number of unexposed workers (e.g.,
office workers in climate-controlled
buildings). Consequently, the working
lifetime risk of HRI estimate based on
BLS’s annual incidence estimates (i.e.,
135 cases per 100,000 workers), also
substantially underestimates the true
risk for heat-exposed workers. There is
also a large body of literature
demonstrating the general
underreporting of work-related injuries
and illnesses, the findings of which
OSHA believes would also apply to
HRIs. See Section V.A., Risk
Assessment, for additional discussion of
underreporting of heat-related fatalities
and HRIs.
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, dozens of peer-reviewed
studies and multiple authoritative
bodies (e.g., NIOSH, ACGIH, ANSI/
ASSP) indicate that the provisions
outlined in this proposed rule would, if
promulgated, substantially reduce risk
to workers. A large body of data
demonstrates that workplace
interventions—such as rest breaks, cool
drinking water, acclimatization, shade,
and fans—can be very effective in
reducing heat strain, which is
responsible for causing HRIs. This
reduction in heat strain and/or
reduction in HRI risk has been shown in
studies that have examined the impact
of interventions in an experimental
setting, as well as studies that have
documented reductions in HRI
prevalence following the
implementation of heat injury and
illness prevention measures. OSHA
preliminarily concludes that
implementation of the proposed
standard will result in a substantial
reduction in HRIs (range of estimates:
37–96%) and heat-related fatalities
(range of estimates: 99.8–100%) in
employees who would be covered under
the proposed standard.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Preliminary Conclusions
OSHA preliminarily concludes that
HRIs associated with workplace
exposure to heat hazards constitute
material harm. Further, based on the
evidence discussed in this section, the
agency preliminarily concludes that
heat-exposed workers are at significant
risk of experiencing a work-related HRI
or heat-related death, and compliance
with the proposed standard would
substantially reduce that risk.
VII. Explanation of Proposed
Requirements
A. Paragraph (a) Scope and Application
Paragraph (a) establishes the scope of
the proposed standard. Paragraph (a)(1)
would require all employers subject to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
OSHA’s jurisdiction—including general
industry, construction, maritime, and
agriculture—to comply with the
proposed requirements, subject to the
exemptions in proposed paragraphs
(a)(2) and (3). The scope of the proposed
standard applies to a wide range of
sectors that include both indoor and
outdoor work areas. The proposed
standard aims to provide protections
while accounting for the different work
areas, anticipated exposures, and other
conditions in these sectors.
Paragraph (a)(2) describes the
exemptions for the proposed standard
based on work activities. Employers
would be responsible for determining
which work activities are covered by the
standard. Although an employer may
have some work activities exempt from
the proposed standard, other activities
may be covered (except for
organizations whose primary function is
the performance of firefighting. See the
discussion of paragraph (a)(2)(iii)
below). Under paragraph (a)(3), if an
employer’s employees exclusively
perform the work activities in
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (vi), then
that employer would be exempt from
this proposed standard.
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) would exclude
work activities for which there is no
reasonable expectation of exposure at or
above the initial heat trigger. This
exception recognizes that some
workplaces would not reasonably be
expected to reach or exceed the initial
heat trigger (e.g., because of their
location and/or seasonal variations in
temperature). This exclusion may apply
to work activities such as operating
seasonal businesses outdoors (e.g.,
during winter months), when
temperatures are lower than the initial
heat trigger. For instance, if a business
that exclusively operates an outdoor
holiday market during the winter season
in a location where daily high
temperatures are always below the
initial heat trigger, this standard would
not apply to work activities performed
at that market.
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) would exclude
short duration employee exposures at or
above the initial heat trigger of 15
minutes or less in any 60-minute period.
OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
intermittent exposures within this
duration are not likely to significantly
raise core body temperature and result
in heat-related injuries and illnesses
(HRIs). Numerous studies (many
described in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction) evaluated the effect of hotter
temperatures on participants’ core body
temperatures under various scenarios
(e.g., clothing type, level of activity,
work/rest periods, acclimatization
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
status) of different durations. Overall,
evidence suggests that heat exposure of
15 minutes or less does not tend to
cause an elevation of at least 1 °C (1.8 °F)
in participants’ core body temperatures,
which would be indicative of potential
heat stress (McLellan & Selkirk, 2006;
Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al.,
2017; Seo et al., 2019; Kaltsatou et al.,
2020; Notley et al., 2022a; Notley et al.,
2022b).
This exemption recognizes that while
typical work activities may take place
below the initial heat trigger, employees
may experience short exposures to heat
at various times during their shift. For
example, an employer who is otherwise
exempt from the standard but has
employees who occasionally walk to
collect mail outside in temperatures at
or above the initial heat trigger for 15
minutes or less in any 60-minute period,
would still be exempt. This exemption
is consistent with the scope exemptions
of Colorado, Washington, and Oregon’s
State standards (7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103–15:3 (2023); Wash. Admin.
Code 296–307–09710 (2023); Or.
Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2024)).
In addition, in order for this
exemption to apply for employees
whose work activities are primarily
performed in air-conditioned vehicles,
employers must ensure employees are
not exposed to temperatures at or above
the initial heat trigger for more than 15
minutes in any 60-minute period. For
instance, where an employee who
drives an air-conditioned vehicle
repeatedly exits the vehicle to deliver
product in temperatures at or above the
initial heat trigger, this activity would
only be exempt from the standard if
cumulative exposure in any 60-minute
period at or above the initial heat trigger
is for 15 minutes or less. If delivery
tasks, such as unloading product from
the vehicle and moving product to its
destination, occur at or above the initial
heat trigger for more than 15 minutes in
any 60-minute period, these work
activities would be covered by the
standard.
Paragraph (a)(2)(iii) would exclude
organizations whose primary function is
the performance of firefighting. It would
also exclude emergency response
activities of workplace emergency
response teams, emergency medical
services (EMS), or technical search and
rescue; 4 and any emergency response
4 ‘‘Technical search and rescue’’ refers to a type
of emergency service that utilizes special
knowledge and skills and specialized equipment to
resolve unique or complex search and rescue
situations, such as rope rescue, vehicle/machinery
rescue, structural collapse, trenches, and technical
water rescue. OSHA intends the phrase to have the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
activities already covered under 29 CFR
1910.120, 1910.146, 1910.156, part
1915, subpart P, 1926.65, and
1926.1211. Fire departments, workplace
emergency response teams, EMS, and
technical search and rescue are covered
by OSHA’s proposed Emergency
Response standard (89 FR 7774, Feb. 5,
2024), which would replace the existing
Fire Brigades standard, 29 CFR
1910.156. The update to 29 CFR
1910.156 would expand coverage from
only fire brigades, industrial fire
departments, and private or contractual
type fire departments, to include
protections for all employees who
perform firefighting, EMS, or technical
search and rescue, as part of their
regularly assigned duties as well as
employees who are members of a
workplace emergency response team. If
the Emergency Response standard is
finalized before this proposed standard,
OSHA intends to revise this exemption
to reflect the updated 29 CFR 1910.156.
The exemption would apply to all
activities (including, e.g., training
activities) at organizations whose
primary function is the performance of
firefighting. In order to comply with the
proposed updates to 29 CFR 1910.156,
firefighting organizations would have
programs in place that address heatrelated hazards for their employees.
For employers with employees who
perform emergency response activities
as members of workplace emergency
response teams (i.e., groups of
employees who prepare for and respond
to emergency incidents at their
workplace as a collateral duty to their
regular daily work assignments; see 89
FR at 7803), or who perform emergency
medical services or technical search and
rescue, this exemption would only
apply when employees are performing
emergency response activities. This
means during periods while these
employees are performing other duties
unrelated to emergency response,
employers would be required to comply
with the provisions of the standard,
unless subject to another exemption. For
example, employees who are part of a
manufacturing plant’s emergency
response team would be exempt from
the standard while responding to an
incident, such as a medical emergency,
but would be covered by the standard
when performing their regular daily
work assignments. All other employees
not engaged in emergency response
would also be covered by this proposed
standard. Although OSHA is proposing
to exempt fire departments entirely, the
agency is not proposing to entirely
same meaning as used in the proposed Emergency
Response standard (see 89 FR 7804).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
exempt organizations that have
employees who perform EMS or
technical search and rescue. This is
because many organizations who
perform EMS (e.g., hospitals) or
technical search and rescue also
conduct many other activities unrelated
to emergency response and OSHA
intends these other activities to be
covered by this proposed standard
unless another exemption applies.
The Emergency Response proposal
includes several hazard assessment and
risk management requirements that
would encompass heat hazards faced by
emergency responders (see 89 FR at
7813–7814). Further, in the NPRM for
Emergency Response, OSHA noted this
rulemaking on heat illness prevention
and invited comment on whether the
agency should include specific
requirements related to heat for some
non-emergency activities of emergency
responders. At the same time, the
agency recognized that at times
emergency responders must perform
their duties regardless of environmental
conditions (89 FR at 7801). OSHA has
preliminarily concluded that it is
appropriate to address any heat-related
hazards posed by emergency response
activities in this separate rulemaking.
This proposed standard would also
not apply to employees when they are
undertaking emergency response
activities under 29 CFR 1910.120,
1910.146, 1910.156, subpart P, 1926.65,
and 1926.1211. Many of these standards
provide employees protection from heat
exposure during emergency activities. In
addition, OSHA believes that the
emergency nature of these activities
warrant special consideration and the
agency is therefore exempting them
from this proposed standard. However,
this proposed standard would otherwise
apply to these employees during nonemergency regular operations unless
another exemption applies. For
example, with regard to the Hazardous
Waste Operations and Emergency
Response Standard (HAZWOPER) (29
CFR 1910.120 and 1926.65), which
covers employees who are exposed or
potentially exposed to hazardous
substances and engaged in one of the
operations as specified by 29 CFR
1910.120(a)(1)(i) through (v) and
1926.65(a)(1)(i) through (v), such as
clean-up operations, employees would
only be exempt when responding to
emergency situations and would be
covered by the standard when
participating in general hazardous waste
operations.
Paragraph (a)(2)(iv) would exclude
work activities performed in indoor
work areas or vehicles where airconditioning consistently keeps the
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70769
ambient temperature below 80 °F. OSHA
specifies using ambient temperature, as
most heating, ventilation, and airconditioning (HVAC) systems
automatically report ambient
temperature. Properly functioning
HVAC units also regulate indoor
humidity levels, which would result in
similar measures of ambient
temperature and heat index.
This exemption would only apply to
indoor work areas and vehicles that are
consistently below an ambient
temperature of 80 °F. The employer
must ensure that the air-conditioning
system consistently maintains an
ambient temperature below 80 °F during
work activities for the exemption to
apply. OSHA recognizes that there may
be unexpected malfunctions of airconditioning systems that result in
periods of time without air-conditioning
before a system is repaired. In these
situations, OSHA would expect that the
employer takes steps to expeditiously
repair the air-conditioning system and
return the workplace to an ambient
temperature below 80 °F.
Paragraph (a)(2)(v) would exclude
telework (i.e., work done from home or
another remote location of the
employee’s choosing). OSHA generally
does not hold employers liable for
employees’ home offices and conditions
of the telework environment (see CPL
02-00-125, available at https://
www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/
cpl-02-00-125). However, only the work
activities employees perform while
teleworking would be exempt and
employers would be required to comply
with the standard when employees are
on site if other exemptions do not apply.
For example, the standard would not
cover work activities conducted at an
employee’s home on Tuesdays and
Thursdays in a given week but would
cover the employee’s work activities at
their employer’s office on Mondays,
Wednesdays, and Fridays (unless
another exemption applies).
Paragraph (a)(2)(vi) would exclude
sedentary work activities at indoor work
areas that only involve some
combination of the following: sitting,
occasional standing and walking for
brief periods of time, and occasional
lifting of objects weighing less than 10
pounds. The exemption is intended to
apply to work sites such as offices
where employees perform sedentary
work activities for extended periods of
time (e.g., all or most of the workday).
This exemption only applies to indoor
work activities, which are not generally
subject to factors such as solar radiation,
which are common in outdoor
exposures. OSHA preliminarily
concludes that employees engaged in
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70770
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
indoor sedentary work activities are at
lower risk of heat-related injury and
illness, as production of metabolic heat
is not substantially elevated.
Experimental studies of groups exposed
to heat (111.4 °F (44 °C), 30% relative
humidity) while resting in a seated
position indicate core body temperature
does not rise more than 1 °C (1.8 °F) over
multiple hours (Kenny et al., 2017;
Notley et al., 2020). In addition to
sitting, the exemption allows for indoor
work activities to include occasional
standing and walking for brief periods
of time, and occasional lifting of objects
weighing less than 10 pounds. When
using the term ‘‘occasional’’ OSHA
means up to one-third of the workday
(BLS, 2021), however these activities
could only be performed for brief
periods of time over the course of the
day for the exemption to apply. For
example, work activities performed at a
desk indoors, where the employee is
seated and performing computer work
for the majority of their shift, but with
occasional standing, as well as walking
short distances (e.g., to use the
photocopier, to collect office mail),
would be exempt from the standard.
In addition, this exemption would
apply to indoor operation of vehicles
while seated. For example, operation of
a forklift inside of a warehouse while
seated would be considered an indoor
sedentary work activity and would be
exempt. However, if a forklift operator’s
duties involved loading and unloading
heavy objects (greater than 10 pounds),
they would not be exempt from the
standard. Other examples of activities
that would be exempt include indoor
operation of reach trucks, tow trucks,
pallet trucks, golf carts, and other
vehicles where employees are seated.
This exemption would apply where
employees are engaged in sedentary
work activities regardless of indoor
temperature. While employees
performing these activities are likely at
lower risk of experiencing heat-related
injury and illness, OSHA seeks
comment as to whether the sedentary
work activities exemption should be
limited to work activities performed in
indoor environments below a specified
threshold temperature (e.g., the high
heat trigger) or whether this exemption
should account for certain workplace
conditions. For example, should this
exemption cover an employer with
employees who meet the criteria in this
proposed exemption, but whose work
area is near a heat generating process
and impacted by radiant heat?
Paragraph (a)(3) specifies that
employers whose employees all
exclusively perform activities described
in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (vi) are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
exempt from this standard. Employers
may have employees who would be
exempt from the standard (e.g.,
employees working indoors where airconditioning consistently keeps the
ambient temperature below 80 °F), as
well as employees who would be
covered by the standard (e.g., employees
harvesting produce outdoors). These
employers would be required to comply
with the provisions of the standard for
the employees who perform work
activities that are covered by the
standard. However, some employers
may only have employees that
exclusively perform work activities that
are exempt from the proposed standard.
For example, an employer with
employees who all either telework from
home or other locations of their
choosing or work inside a building with
air-conditioning that consistently keeps
the ambient temperature below 80 °F
would be exempt from the standard.
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether any of the proposed
exclusions of emergency response
activities already covered under the
standards listed in proposed paragraph
(a)(2)(iii) should be covered by this
proposed standard. If so, provide
evidence and describe reason for why
these activities should not be excluded;
• Where an employer relies on the
exemption in proposed paragraph
(a)(2)(iv) to exclude work activities
performed in indoor work areas or
vehicles where air-conditioning
consistently keeps the ambient
temperature below 80 °F, whether the
standard should address situations
where the air-conditioning system does
not function properly and the ambient
temperature reaches or exceeds 80 °F;
for example, should certain
requirements of the standard apply in
this scenario? Additionally, whether the
standard should specify how long the
air-conditioning system can be out of
order before the exemption no longer
applies;
• Whether the description of
sedentary work in the proposed
standard is appropriate, and if not, what
revisions would be appropriate;
• Whether the standard should
exempt all sedentary work activities
indoors or limit the exemption to only
activities performed below an upper
limit (e.g., below the high heat trigger)
at or above which the exemption would
no longer apply, and if so, what the
upper limit should be and what
evidence exists demonstrating that even
sedentary work performed indoors can
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
be a hazard to workers at or above that
limit; and
• Whether the exemption for
sedentary work activities should be
expanded to include work performed
outdoors.
B. Paragraph (b) Definitions
Paragraph (b) defines several terms
used in the proposed standard. First, it
defines Acclimatization to mean the
body’s adaptation to work in the heat as
a person is exposed to heat gradually
over time, which reduces the strain
caused by heat stress and enables a
person to work with less chance of heat
illness or injury.
Section V.C., Risk Reduction contains
more information on effectiveness of
acclimatization. This definition is
included because paragraph (e)(7) of the
proposed standard establishes
requirements to protect new and
returning employees who are not
acclimatized. Proposed paragraph (e)(7)
requires that employers implement one
of two acclimatization protocols for new
and returning employees when the
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded.
Under paragraph (j), employers must
implement acclimatization protocols at
no cost to the employee. In addition,
proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iii) requires
that employees be trained that lack of
acclimatization is a risk factor for HRI.
Ambient temperature means the
temperature of the air surrounding a
body. Other terms for ambient
temperature include ‘‘air temperature’’
or ‘‘dry bulb temperature.’’ Ambient
temperature is measured by a standard
thermometer and often what people
refer to when using the term
‘‘temperature.’’ Ambient temperature is
defined because it is used in the
definitions for heat index and wet bulb
globe temperature, in addition to
proposed paragraphs (a) Scope and
application, (d) Identifying heat
hazards, (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, and (f)
Requirements at or above the high heat
trigger.
Cooling personal protective
equipment (PPE) means equipment that
is worn to protect the user against heatrelated injury or illness. This definition
is included to clarify the requirement
under proposed paragraph (e)(1) that if
the employer provides employees with
cooling PPE, the cooling properties must
be maintained during use.
Cooling PPE is gear designed to help
maintain a safe body temperature for
individuals working in hot
environments or engaged in physically
demanding activities. Cooling PPE
typically employs various technologies
to facilitate heat dissipation and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
enhance comfort, such as water
absorption crystals or phase change
materials (PCM) which draw heat away
from the wearer. Cooling bandanas and
neck wraps are worn around the neck
and can be soaked in cold water.
Additionally, other types of clothing
may incorporate materials that have
cooling properties.
Heat index means the National
Weather Service heat index, which
combines ambient temperature and
humidity. It provides a number that can
be used to indicate how hot it feels.
There are several tools for measuring
heat index in both indoor and outdoor
work areas. For outdoor work areas, the
OSHA–NIOSH Heat Safety Tool app and
other phone-based weather apps can be
used to show the heat index by location
as well as hourly forecasts. For indoor
work areas, employers can enter
measurements of humidity and ambient
temperature into the NOAA Heat Index
Calculator. There are also monitoring
devices that report heat index. Heat
index is defined because the term is
used in definitions of high heat trigger
and initial heat trigger. The term is also
used in proposed paragraphs (c) Heat
injury and illness prevention plan, (d)
Identifying heat hazards, and (e)
Requirements at or above the initial
heat trigger.
High heat trigger means a heat index
of 90 °F or a wet bulb globe temperature
(WBGT) equal to the NIOSH
Recommended Exposure Limit. See
explanations for the definitions of wet
bulb globe temperature (WBGT) and
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) for
more information about those terms.
OSHA is including a definition for high
heat trigger because exposures at or
above the high heat trigger would
require the implementation of a number
of controls, in addition to the controls
that would be implemented under the
initial heat trigger in proposed
paragraph (e). The controls
implemented under the initial heat
trigger are described below under the
definition for Initial Heat Trigger. The
additional controls that would be
implemented under the high heat trigger
under proposed paragraph (f) include
required rest breaks, observation for
signs and symptoms, hazard alerts, and
warning signs for excessively high heat
areas. See Section VII.F., Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for more
information on these controls. The
scientific basis supporting the
establishment of the high heat trigger at
a heat index of 90 °F or a WBGT equal
to the NIOSH REL is explained in in
Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High
Heat Triggers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Indoor/indoors means an area under a
ceiling or overhead covering that
restricts airflow and has along its entire
perimeter walls, doors, windows,
dividers, or other physical barriers that
restrict airflow, whether open or closed.
Possible examples for indoors include
work in a garage, even if the garage door
is open; the interior of a warehouse,
even if multiple doors are open on
loading docks; and a shed with four
walls and a ceiling, even if the windows
are open. Construction activity is
considered to be work in an indoor
environment when performed inside a
structure after the outside walls and roof
are erected. This definition is included
because the term is used in definitions
for outdoor/outdoors, and proposed
paragraphs (a) Scope and application,
(d) Identifying heat hazards, (e)
Requirements at or above the initial
heat trigger, (f) Requirements at or
above the high heat trigger, and (i)
Recordkeeping.
Initial heat trigger means a heat index
of 80 °F or a WBGT equal to the NIOSH
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL). See
explanations for the definitions of wet
bulb globe temperature (WBGT) and
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL) for
more information about those terms.
OSHA is including a definition for
initial heat trigger because exposures at
or above the initial heat trigger would
require the implementation of a number
of controls under proposed paragraph
(e), including requirements for drinking
water, break area(s) for indoor and
outdoor work sites, indoor work area
controls, acclimatization of new and
returning employees, rest breaks if
needed to prevent overheating, effective
communication, and maintenance of
PPE cooling properties if PPE is
provided. See Section VII.E.,
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for more information on these controls.
The scientific basis supporting the
establishment of the initial heat trigger
at a heat index of 80 °F or a wet bulb
globe temperature (WBGT) equal to the
NIOSH RAL is explained in detail in
Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High
Heat Triggers.
Outdoor/outdoors means an area that
is not indoors, as defined above. The
definition also specifies that vehicles
operated outdoors are considered
outdoor work areas for purposes of this
standard unless exempted by paragraph
(a)(2). Examples of outdoor work
include tasks performed in agricultural
fields and under canopies and
pavilions. This term is defined because
it is used in proposed paragraphs (d)
Identifying heat hazards, (e)
Requirements at or above the initial
heat trigger, and (h) Training.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70771
Radiant heat means heat transferred
by electromagnetic waves between
surfaces. This definition further notes
that sources of radiant heat include the
sun, hot objects, hot liquids, hot
surfaces, and fire.
Radiant heat is transferred from a
hotter object to a cooler object. The
transfer of radiant heat can occur across
distances and does not require objects to
touch each other. Infrared radiation is a
common source of radiant heat that is
encountered in foundries, and in iron,
steel, and glass industries (NIOSH,
2016). Sources of exposure to radiant
heat in the workplace can include
furnaces, ovens, and combustion.
Radiant heat is defined because it is
included in the definition for wet bulb
globe temperature (WBGT) and is used
in paragraph (e) Requirements at or
above the initial heat trigger.
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL)
means the NIOSH-recommended heat
stress alert limits for unacclimatized
workers. OSHA is proposing to
incorporate by reference NIOSH
Publication No. 2016–106 Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational
Exposure to Heat and Hot Environments
(NIOSH, 2016). OSHA is including a
definition for RAL because the initial
heat trigger incorporates the NIOSH
RAL. Thus, several provisions of the
standard are triggered by either a heat
index of 80 °F or a wet bulb globe
temperature (WBGT) equal to the
NIOSH RAL. See Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for Definitions
(initial heat trigger, wet bulb globe
temperature) and proposed paragraph
(e), Requirements at or above the Initial
heat trigger for more details.
NIOSH (2016) developed the RAL to
protect most healthy non-acclimatized
employees from adverse effects of heat
stress and recommends that total heat
exposure for non-acclimatized
employees be controlled to maintain
combinations of environmental and
metabolic heat below the applicable
RAL in order to maintain thermal
equilibrium. Environmental exposures
are based on WBGT, which accounts for
the contributions of ambient
temperature, radiant heat, humidity,
and wind speed. Metabolic heat
production is estimated by workload.
The RAL assumes employees are
wearing ‘‘the conventional one-layer
work clothing ensemble,’’ but NIOSH
provides guidance for adjusting the
WBGT based on the types of clothing or
PPE worn. The formula for calculating
the RAL is: RAL [ °C¥WBGT] = 59.9–
14.1 log10M[W], where M is metabolic
rate in watts (W).
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL)
means the NIOSH-recommended heat
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70772
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
stress exposure limits for acclimatized
workers. OSHA is proposing to
incorporate by reference NIOSH
Publication No. 2016–106 Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational
Exposure to Heat and Hot Environments
(NIOSH, 2016). OSHA is including a
definition for REL because the high heat
trigger incorporates the NIOSH REL.
Thus, several provisions of the standard
are triggered by either a heat index of
90 °F or a wet bulb globe temperature
(WBGT) equal to the NIOSH REL. See
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for Definitions (high heat trigger, wet
bulb globe temperature) and proposed
paragraph (f), Requirements at or above
the high heat trigger for more details.
NIOSH (2016) developed the REL to
protect most healthy acclimatized
employees from adverse effects of heat
stress and recommends that total heat
exposure for acclimatized employees be
controlled to maintain combinations of
environmental and metabolic heat
below the applicable REL in order to
maintain thermal equilibrium.
Environmental exposures are based on
WBGT, which accounts for the
contributions of ambient temperature,
radiant heat, humidity, and wind speed.
Metabolic heat production is estimated
by workload. The REL assume
employees are wearing ‘‘the
conventional one-layer work clothing
ensemble,’’ but NIOSH provides
guidance for adjusting WBGT based on
the types of clothing or PPE worn. The
formula for calculating the REL is: REL
[ °C¥WBGT]= 56.7–11.5 log10M[W],
where M is metabolic rate in watts (W).
Shade is defined as the blockage of
direct sunlight, such that objects do not
cast a shadow in the area of blocked
sunlight. This definition is included to
clarify the requirements for use of shade
as a control in outdoor break areas
under proposed paragraph (e)(3)(i).
Shade can be artificial or naturally
occurring. See Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(3).
Signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
and includes headache, nausea,
weakness, dizziness, elevated body
temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms. This term is
used throughout the proposal to refer to
a range of signs and symptoms that may
result from a variety of heat-related
illnesses (see Section IV., Health Effects
for a detailed discussion of heat-related
illnesses and the accompanying
symptoms). This term is defined to
provide clarity about scenarios for
which an employer must develop
procedures for responding to employees
experiencing signs and symptoms of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heat-related illness in their heat
emergency response plan, as well as the
scenarios that an employer would be
required to take specific actions to aid
affected employees under proposed
paragraph (g). This definition also
provides clarity on the requirements to
train employees on signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness (see proposed
paragraph (h)(iv)) and monitor
employees for signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness (see proposed
paragraph (f)(3).
Signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
that require emergency response and
include loss of consciousness (i.e.,
fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be
accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or
bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting
irrationally or disoriented, having
convulsions, and (even after resting)
having an elevated heart rate. This term
is defined to provide clarity about
scenarios for which an employer must
develop procedures to respond to
employees experiencing signs and
symptoms of a heat emergency in their
heat emergency response plan, as well
as the scenarios in which an employer
would be required to take specific
actions to aid affected employees under
proposed paragraph (g). This definition
also provides clarity on the
requirements to train employees on
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness and which ones require
immediate emergency action (see
proposed paragraph (h)(iv)).
Vapor-impermeable clothing means
full-body clothing that significantly
inhibits or completely prevents sweat
produced by the body from evaporating
into the outside air. The definition
further indicates that examples include
encapsulating suits, various forms of
chemical resistant suits, and other forms
of non-breathable PPE. This definition is
included because under proposed
paragraph (c)(3) employers that have
employees who wear vaporimpermeable clothing would be
required to evaluate heat stress hazards
resulting from these clothing and
implement policies and procedures
based on reputable sources to protect
employees while wearing this clothing.
Vapor-impermeable clothing is also
referred to as ‘‘vapor barrier’’ clothing.
It is a type of protective clothing that
employers may provide to employees to
protect them from chemical, physical, or
biological hazards for work tasks such
as hazardous waste clean-up. Examples
include metallic reflective clothing or
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
chemical resistant clothing made from
plastics such as vinyl or nylonreinforced polyethylene (Mihal, 1981).
Materials made from 100% high density
polyethylene (e.g., Tyvek®) that allow
water vapor and gases to pass through
are not vapor-impermeable, but
lamination of the materials with some
substances such as polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) can change the breathability of
the materials and render them vaporimpermeable (DuPont, 2024; Paull and
Rosenthal, 1987). Because the proposed
definition indicates ‘‘full-body
clothing’’, it would not include vaporimpermeable PPE that covers small
areas of the body (e.g., gloves, boots,
aprons, leggings, gauntlets). However,
clothing such as boots and gloves made
from vapor-impermeable materials such
as rubber may be part of whole-body,
vapor-impermeable clothing ensembles
(Mihal, 1981; Paull and Rosenthal,
1987). Employers could check product
information provided by manufacturers
to determine if clothing worn by their
employees qualifies as vaporimpermeable clothing.
Vehicle means a car, truck, van, or
other motorized means of transporting
people or goods. Other examples may
include a forklift, reach truck, tow truck,
pallet truck, or bus, among others. In
addition, vehicles may also include
equipment such as a bulldozer, road
grader, farm tractor, or crane. Under the
proposed definitions, a vehicle would
be a work area when a worker’s work
activities occur in the vehicle.
Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT)
is a heat metric that takes into account
ambient temperature, humidity, radiant
heat from sunlight or artificial heat
sources, and air movement. It can be
measured in both indoor and outdoor
work areas, however there are separate
formulas depending on whether the
device is being used indoors or
outdoors. WBGT is used by NIOSH and
ACGIH in their guidance for evaluating
occupational heat stress. The term is
defined because it is used in the
definitions for the high and initial heat
triggers and in proposed paragraphs (c)
Heat injury and illness prevention plan
and (d) Identifying heat hazards.
Work area means an area where one
or more employees are working within
a work site. This includes any area
where an employee performs any workrelated activity. A work area may be
located at the employer’s premises or
other locations where an employee may
be engaged in work-related activities or
is present as a condition of their
employment. Work area is defined
because it is referenced in several
provisions of the proposed standard,
including (a) Scope and application, (c)
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Heat injury and illness prevention plan
(HIIPP), (d) Identifying heat hazards, (e)
Requirements at or above the initial
heat trigger, (f) Requirements at or
above the high heat trigger, and (i)
Recordkeeping.
Work site means a physical location
(e.g., fixed, mobile) where the
employer’s work or operations are
performed. It includes outdoor and
indoor areas, individual structures or
groups of structures, and all areas where
work or any work-related activity occurs
(e.g., taking breaks, going to the
restroom, eating, entering or exiting
work). The work site includes the
entirety of any space associated with the
employer’s operations (e.g.,
workstations, hallways, stairwells,
breakrooms, bathrooms, elevators) and
any other space that an employee might
occupy in arriving, working, or leaving.
A work site may or may not be under
the employer’s control. Work site is
defined because it is referenced in
several provisions of the proposed
standard including Heat Injury and
Prevention Plan (HIIPP) (proposed
paragraph (c)), Identifying heat hazards
(proposed paragraph (d)), Requirements
at or above the initial heat trigger
(proposed paragraph (e)), Requirements
at or above the high heat trigger
(proposed paragraph (f)), Heat illness
and emergency response and planning
(proposed paragraph (g)), and Training
(proposed paragraph (h)).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments as to
whether the proposed definitions are
appropriate, and whether any additional
terms should be defined in the standard.
C. Paragraph (c) Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Plan
Proposed paragraph (c) includes
provisions for the development and
implementation of a work site heat
injury and illness prevention plan,
referred to as a ‘‘HIIPP’’ or ‘‘plan’’ for
the remainder of this section, as well as
requirements regarding what would
need to be in the plan. The development
of a HIIPP, including comprehensive
policies and procedures, is necessary to
ensure that all affected employees,
including exposed workers, supervisors,
and heat safety coordinators,
understand where heat hazards exist at
the workplace and the workplacespecific measures that must be utilized
to address those hazards. The NIOSH
Criteria Document provides information
on the importance of a HIIPP to reduce
the risk of heat-related injuries and
illness (NIOSH, 2016). Requiring a
HIIPP is also consistent with regulations
from several of the States that have
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
enacted or proposed heat-specific
standards. There is a plan requirement
in existing heat standards from
California (Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8,
section 3395 (2005)), Washington
(Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–
095 through 296–62–09560; 296–307–
097 through 296–307–09760 (2023));
and Oregon (Or. Admin. R. 437–002–
0156 (2022); Or. Admin. R. 437–004–
1131 (2022)). Maryland and Nevada
proposed heat standards that would also
require a HIIPP (MD, 2024; NV, 2022).
Additionally, this requirement aligns
with the recommendations from the
NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group, where the
group provided a list of potential
elements to include in a HIIPP. All the
requirements in paragraph (c) would
have to be included in the employer’s
HIIPP.
Paragraph (c)(1) would require
employers to develop and implement a
comprehensive HIIPP for each work site.
Under proposed paragraph (b), a work
site is defined as a physical location
(e.g., fixed, mobile) where the
employer’s work or operations are
performed. If an employer has multiple
work sites that are substantially similar,
the HIIPP may be developed by work
site type rather than by individual work
sites so long as any site-specific
information is included in the plan (e.g.,
phone numbers and addresses or sitespecific heat sources). For example, if
an employer has developed a corporate
HIIPP that includes information about
job tasks or exposure scenarios that
apply at multiple work sites, this
information can be used in the
development of HIIPPs for individual
work sites. When employees are in work
areas not controlled by the employer
(like private residences), employers
would need procedures for how they
will ensure compliance with the
standard (e.g., ensure that effective
communication is being maintained
(proposed paragraph (f)(3)(iii)) and
employees are receiving hazard alerts to
remind them of protections such as the
importance of drinking plenty of water,
their right to take breaks, and locations
of break sites and drinking water
(proposed paragraph (f)(4)). These
employers must include such policies
and procedures in their HIIPP to protect
their employees entering those locations
not controlled by the employer.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) specifies
the contents of the HIIPP. Proposed
paragraph (c)(2)(i) would require the
HIIPP to include a comprehensive list of
the types of work activities covered by
the plan. For example, a landscaping
company could indicate that all
employees conducting outdoor work at
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70773
or above the initial heat trigger for at
least 15 minutes in any 60-minute
period (e.g., lawn care workers,
gardeners, stonemasons, and general
laborers) would be covered by the
HIIPP. (See proposed paragraphs
(a)(2)(i), (ii), and (iv) and Explanation
for Proposed Requirements for
Paragraph (a) Scope and Application for
more detail about coverage under the
standard.) Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) would
require the inclusion of the policies and
procedures that are necessary to comply
with the requirements of this proposed
standard. See Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraphs (d) through
(j) for examples of how employers could
comply with the proposed provisions.
OSHA understands that a HIIPP must be
adaptable to the physical characteristics
of the work site and the job tasks
performed by employees, as well as the
hazards identified by the employer
when designing their HIIPP. Employers
could also include other policies,
procedures, or information necessary to
comply with any applicable Federal,
State, or local laws, standards, and
guidelines in their HIIPPs. Paragraph
(c)(2)(iii) would require that employers
identify the heat metric (i.e., heat index
or wet bulb globe temperature) that the
employer will monitor to comply with
paragraph (d). For more information on
heat metrics, see Explanation for
Proposed Requirements for Paragraph
(b) Definitions for heat index and
WBGT.
Paragraph (c)(3) would require that, in
cases where employees wear vaporimpermeable clothing (also called vapor
barrier clothing), employers must
evaluate heat stress hazards resulting
from this clothing and implement
policies and procedures based on
reputable sources to protect employees
while wearing these clothing. The
employer must include these policies
and procedures and document the
evaluation in the HIIPP. Under
proposed paragraph (b), vaporimpermeable clothing is defined as fullbody clothing that significantly inhibits
or completely prevents sweat produced
by the body from evaporating into the
outside air. The definition further
indicates that examples include
encapsulating suits, various forms of
chemical resistant suits, and other forms
of non-breathable PPE. For more
information on vapor-impermeable
clothing, see the Explanation for
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(b) Definitions. This attention to vaporimpermeable clothing is essential given
that significant or complete inhibition of
sweat evaporation can greatly increase
the potential for heat stress and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70774
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
resulting heat strain and HRI (Mihal,
1981).
The requirement that employers
evaluate heat stress and develop
policies and procedures to protect
employees based on reputable sources
allows for flexibility, given that there is
variability in duration of use of the
vapor-impermeable clothing and that
workload also varies across job tasks
and occupations. Examples of reputable
sources employers can consult to assess
heat stress and develop policies and
procedures to protect employees
wearing vapor-impermeable clothing
include recommendations by NIOSH
(2016) and ACGIH (2023). An example
of a policy employers might adopt to
protect employees wearing vaporimpermeable clothing is implementing
the protections in the standard at a
lower temperature threshold. Such an
approach has been used in State
standards such as the Washington heat
standard for outdoor workplaces (Wash.
Admin. Code 296–307–09747 (2023)). In
Washington State’s heat standard,
employers must implement certain
controls when employees are wearing
vapor barrier clothing, and the
temperature is above 52 °F. Paragraph
(c)(3) does not apply to vapor-permeable
clothing or PPE such as cotton coveralls,
SMS polypropylene or polyolefin
coveralls, double layer woven clothing,
or wool shirts (ACGIH, 2023; ACGIH,
2017; NIOSH, 2016).
Paragraph (c)(3) would require the
employer to document in the HIIPP the
hazard evaluation performed to comply
with this provision and to include in the
HIIPP the policies and procedures
developed to protect employee’s
wearing vapor-impermeable clothing.
Although OSHA is not specifying a
particular form for the required hazard
evaluation, an effective hazard
evaluation would include a review of
environmental heat exposures, a review
of the high-risk area(s), tasks, and
occupations, and an evaluation of the
length of time and intensity of task
when wearing vapor-impermeable
clothing. Policies and procedures
should include communication of the
status of planned or completed actions
to employees who may have to wear
vapor-impermeable clothing to complete
work tasks. For more information on
identifying heat hazards, see
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (d) below.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(4), an
employer with more than 10 employees
would be required to develop and
implement a written HIIPP. While
OSHA has concluded that a HIIPP is
necessary for all employers covered by
the standard, OSHA has determined that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
only employers with more than 10
employees need to have a written plan.
This cutoff of 10 employees is
consistent with OSHA’s practice of
allowing employers with 10 or fewer
employees to communicate their
emergency action plans (29 CFR
1910.38) and fire prevention plans (29
CFR 1910.39) orally to employees.
OSHA expects that small employers
with 10 or fewer employees are likely to
have less complicated HIIPPs and will
communicate with employees verbally.
The agency does not believe that there
is a high likelihood of misunderstanding
when employers communicate their
HIIPPs to employees verbally. As a
result, OSHA does not believe the added
burden on small employers of
establishing a written plan is necessary.
However, small employers may opt to
create a written HIIPP if they find doing
so is helpful in developing and
implementing their plans.
In contrast, the agency is concerned
that when employers have more than 10
employees, there is likely sufficient
complexity in the employer’s operation
that putting the HIIPP in writing is
necessary to establish clear expectations
and prevent miscommunication. For
example, employers with more than 10
employees may have employees
working in multiple locations or on
multiple shifts, increasing the
likelihood that verbally communicating
the employer’s HIIPP will be ineffective.
Therefore, OSHA preliminarily finds
that having a written HIIPP that
employees of larger employers can
easily access is essential to ensure those
employees are informed about policies,
programs, and protections implemented
by their employers to protect them from
hazardous heat exposure.
An employer may have already
developed and implemented a HIIPP.
Existing plans may fulfill some of the
requirements in this section. It is not
OSHA’s intent for employers to
duplicate current effective HIIPPs, but
each employer with a current HIIPP
would have to evaluate that plan for
completeness to ensure it satisfies all
the requirements of this section.
Employers with existing plans would be
required to modify and/or update their
current HIIPP plans to incorporate any
missing required elements and provide
training on these new updates or
modifications to all employees (see the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for Paragraph (h) Training). Employers
with more than 10 employees would
have to ensure their existing HIIPP is in
writing.
Paragraph (c)(5) would require the
employer to designate one or more
workplace heat safety coordinators to
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
implement and monitor the HIIPP. Any
employee(s) capable of performing the
role who receives the training required
by proposed paragraphs (h)(1) and (2)
can be designated heat safety
coordinator(s). This employee(s) does
not need to be someone with specialized
training. The heat safety coordinator(s)
could be a supervisor or an employee
that the employer designates. The heat
safety coordinator(s) must have the
authority to ensure compliance with all
aspects of the HIIPP. This requirement
would ensure heat safety coordinators
can take prompt corrective measures
when hazards are identified. Proposed
paragraph (c)(5) would also require that
for employers with more than 10
employees, the identity of the heat
safety coordinator(s) must be
documented in the written HIIPP.
Employers must designate a heat safety
coordinator(s) to implement and
monitor the HIIPP plan, but the exact
responsibilities of a heat safety
coordinator(s) may vary based on the
employer and work site. Some possible
duties of the heat safety coordinator(s)
could include conducting regular
inspections of the work site to ensure
the HIIPP is being implemented
appropriately and to monitor the
ongoing effectiveness of the plan.
During such inspections, the heat safety
coordinator(s) could observe employees
to ensure they are protecting themselves
by frequently drinking water or taking
rest breaks that employers would be
required to provide.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(6), the
employer would be required to seek the
input and involvement of nonmanagerial employees and their
representatives, if any, in the
development and implementation of the
HIIPP. An employer could seek
feedback from employees through a
variety of means, including safety
meetings, a safety committee,
conversations between a supervisor and
non-managerial employees, a process
negotiated with the exclusive bargaining
agent (if any), or any other similarly
interactive process. The method of
soliciting employee input is flexible and
may vary based on the employer and the
work site. For example, a large employer
with many employees may find a safety
committee with representatives from
various job categories combined with
anonymous suggestion boxes to be more
effective than individual conversations
between supervisors and nonmanagerial employees. In the case of a
unionized workplace, a safety
committee established through a
collective bargaining agreement may be
the appropriate source for this input,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
based on the definition and scope of the
committee’s work. In contrast, a small
employer might determine that an
ongoing interactive process between the
employer and employees (e.g., regular
safety meetings) is a more effective
means of soliciting employee feedback.
OSHA understands employees often
know the most about potential hazards
associated with their jobs. As such,
employee participation is a key
component of effective safety and health
programs.
Paragraph (c)(7) would require the
employer to review and evaluate the
effectiveness of the HIIPP whenever a
heat-related injury or illness occurs that
results in death, days away from work,
medical treatment beyond first aid, or
loss of consciousness, but at least
annually. Following each review, the
employer would be required to update
the HIIPP as necessary. The employer
would have to seek input and
involvement of non-managerial
employees and their representatives, if
any, during any reviews and updates.
OSHA preliminarily finds that a heatrelated illness or injury that results in
death, days away from work, medical
treatment beyond first aid, or loss of
consciousness warrants an evaluation of
the HIIPP because it could potentially
indicate a deficiency of the HIIPP.
Additionally, the heat safety coordinator
might learn of a deficiency during an
inspection or from another employee.
OSHA expects that employers would
immediately address any identified
deficiencies and update the HIIPP
accordingly. Under proposed paragraph
(h)(4)(iv), all employees would have to
be retrained following a heat-related
injury or illness that results in death,
days away from work, medical
treatment beyond first aid, or loss of
consciousness, and under proposed
paragraph (h)(4)(ii) employees would
have to be retrained if identification of
a deficiency results in an update to the
HIIPP. OSHA preliminarily finds that
effective heat injury and illness
prevention plans would require periodic
evaluation to ensure they are
implemented as intended and continue
to achieve the goal of preventing heat
injury and illness and promoting
workplace safety and health. This reevaluation can result in improvements
in controls to help reduce hazards.
Paragraph (c)(8) would require the
employer to make the HIIPP readily
available at the work site to all
employees performing work at the work
site. The HIIPP would have to be readily
accessible during each work shift to
employees when they are in their work
area(s). Paper copies, electronic access
(i.e., accessible via smart phone) and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
other alternatives to maintaining paper
copies of the HIIPP are permitted as
long as no barriers to immediate
employee access in each work site are
created by such options.
Paragraph (c)(9) would require the
employer to ensure the HIIPP is
available in a language each employee,
supervisor, and heat safety coordinator
understands. Under proposed paragraph
(c)(4), this would require written
translations of the plan in all languages
that employees, supervisors, and heat
safety coordinators understand.
Employers could comply with this
requirement by utilizing one of the
numerous translator programs available
online if the employer has a way to
ensure accuracy of the translated
materials. In cases where an employee,
supervisor, or heat safety coordinator
can read and comprehend English, but
prefers to read in another language, the
employer would have no obligation to
provide a written translation of the plan
in that individual’s preferred language.
If one or more employees are not
literate, the employer would have to
ensure that someone is available to read
the written plan in a language that each
employee understands. Likewise, for
employers who have less than 10
employees, the employer would have to
ensure that someone is available to
explain the plan in a language that each
employee, supervisor, and heat safety
coordinator understands. OSHA expects
that an individual who speaks
employees’ languages will be available
in all workplaces since effective
communication between individuals
such as employers, supervisors, and
employees would need to occur in order
for employees to understand the details
about the work tasks they need to
complete.
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• The approaches that stakeholders
are taking to assess heat stress and
prevent HRI in employees wearing
vapor-impermeable clothing;
• Whether OSHA should specify a
temperature that would trigger all or
certain requirements of the standard for
employees wearing vapor-impermeable
clothing;
• Additional approaches that OSHA
should consider to protect employees
wearing vapor-impermeable clothing;
• Whether the proposed requirement
to seek input and involvement from
non-managerial employees and their
representatives under paragraph (c)(6) is
adequate, or whether the explanation
should be expanded or otherwise
amended (and if so, how and why);
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70775
• Whether OSHA should define
‘‘employee representative’’ and, if so,
whether the agency should specify that
non-union employees can designate a
non-employee third-party (e.g., a safety
and health specialist, a worker advocacy
group, or a community organization) to
provide expertise and input on their
behalf;
• Whether it is reasonable to require
the HIIPP be made available in a
language that each employee,
supervisor, and heat and safety
coordinator understands;
• What methods and programs are
available to provide employees
documents and information in multiple
languages, whether there are languages
for which these resources are not
available, and how employers can
provide adequate quality control to
ensure that the translations are done
properly; and
• Whether individuals are available at
workplaces to provide verbal
translations of the plan for employees
who are not literate or do not speak
English.
D. Paragraph (d) Identifying Heat
Hazards
Proposed paragraph (d) sets forth
requirements for assessing where and
when employees are exposed to heat at
or above the initial and high heat
triggers. It would require employers
with outdoor work sites to monitor heat
conditions at outdoor work areas by
tracking local heat index forecasts or
measuring the heat metric of their
choosing (heat index or wet bulb globe
temperature (WBGT)). It would require
employers with indoor work sites to
identify work areas where there is a
reasonable expectation that employees
are or may be exposed to heat at or
above the initial heat trigger and
implement a plan for monitoring these
areas to determine when exposures
above the initial and high heat triggers
occur, using the heat metric of their
choosing (heat index or WBGT).
Determining when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the initial
and high heat triggers is critical for
ensuring that employees are provided
with appropriate protections (outlined
in paragraphs (e) and (f)).
Proposed paragraph (d)(1) would
require employers whose employees
perform work outdoors to monitor the
heat conditions at the work areas where
employees are working. Employers
would have two options for complying
with this requirement—tracking local
heat index forecasts provided by
National Weather Service (NWS) or
other reputable sources or making on-
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70776
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
site measurements using monitoring
device(s).
Employers who choose to track local
forecasts would need to consult a
reputable source for local heat index
forecasts such as their local NWS
Weather Forecast Office, the OSHA–
NIOSH Heat Safety Tool cell phone
application, or another weather forecast
website or cell phone application. When
using these sources, employers would
need to accurately enter the location of
the work area. The OSHA–NIOSH Heat
Safety Tool (and other cell phone
applications) will automatically use
GPS to determine the user’s location, so
the forecast may be inaccurate if using
the tool at home and employers will
need to manually enter the work area
location in these situations.
Employers who choose to conduct onsite monitoring would need to set up
monitoring devices at or as close as
possible to the work area. This could
mean setting up the device(s) on a
tripod a few yards away from an
employee. When there are multiple
work areas at the same work site, the
employer could use a single monitoring
device to measure heat exposure for
multiple work areas if there is no
reasonable anticipation that the heat
exposure will differ between work areas.
For example, if employees are
harvesting crops on different fields but
are within a mile of one another under
similar work conditions, the employer
could use a single monitoring device. If
there is reasonable anticipation that
employees at a work site have different
levels of exposure, employers could
measure the exposure at the work area
of the employee(s) reasonably expected
to have the highest exposure and apply
that value to all employees at the work
site instead of measuring the exposure
for each work area.
Employers using heat index as their
heat metric could either use heat index
monitors or measure temperature and
humidity with separate devices. In the
latter situation, these employers would
need to use a heat index calculator, such
as the one provided on the NWS website
(NWS, 2023), to calculate heat index
from the separate temperature and
humidity readings. Employers using
WBGT as their heat metric would need
to take into account differences in solar
radiation and wind between work areas
when deciding whether a single
measurement could be used for multiple
work areas. For example, measurements
of WBGT in a work area in the shade
should not be applied to another work
area that is not in the shade. Regardless
of which metric they choose to use,
employers conducting on-site
monitoring should consult user manuals
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
and ensure devices are calibrated and in
working order. Employers should follow
the device manufacturer’s manual when
conducting monitoring.
Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would
require employers whose employees
perform work outdoors to consult the
weather forecast or their monitoring
device(s)—whichever they are using to
comply with paragraph (d)(1)—
frequently enough to determine with
reasonable accuracy when conditions at
the work area reach the initial and high
heat triggers. Employers consulting
forecasts would need to check the
forecast as close to the start of the work
shift as possible to determine whether
and when the heat index at the work
area may be at or above the initial or
high heat triggers. Depending on the
forecast or conditions at the work site,
the employer then may or may not need
to conduct further monitoring during
the day. If, for example, the employer
consulted the OSHA–NIOSH Heat
Safety Tool before the work shift and it
indicated that the heat index would
exceed the initial heat trigger but not the
high heat trigger during the last four
hours of the work shift, the employer
would need to either: (1) implement
control measures in accordance with
paragraph (e) for those four hours, or (2)
consult the Heat Safety Tool again later
in the day and implement control
measures in accordance with paragraph
(e) only for the hours during which realtime conditions reported by the
application exceed the initial heat
trigger (which may be more or less than
four hours if the forecast earlier in the
day underestimated or overestimated
the heat index). However, if the
employer consulted the OSHA–NIOSH
Heat Safety Tool before the work shift
and it indicated that the heat index
would be close to the initial heat trigger
but not exceed it, employers would
need to check the forecast again later in
the day to determine whether the trigger
was exceeded. Employers would need to
use short-term forecasts (i.e., hourly)
rather than long-term forecasts (e.g.,
weekly, monthly) to comply with
proposed paragraphs (d)(1) and (2).
Ultimately, the employer is responsible
for ensuring that the controls required at
the initial and high heat trigger are in
place when those triggers are met, and
they should make decisions regarding
the frequency of monitoring with this in
mind.
Likewise, employers who conduct onsite monitoring in order to comply with
paragraph (d)(1) will need to develop a
reasonable measurement strategy that is
adapted to the expected conditions. If
forecasts provide no suggestion that the
initial heat trigger could be reached
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
during the work shift, an employer may
not need to take any measurements.
Where temperatures are expected to
approach the initial or high heat
triggers, several measurements may be
necessary, particularly as the hottest
part of the day approaches. For
example, if the employer measures at 10
a.m. and the heat index is very close but
below the initial heat trigger, the
employer would likely need to either
check again sometime shortly thereafter
or assume that the trigger is exceeded.
WBGT accounts for additional
parameters—air speed and radiant
heat—so employers using WBGT may
need to make additional measurements
when these conditions change at the
work site.
Proposed paragraphs (d)(3)(i) and (ii)
outline the requirements for assessing
heat hazards in indoor work sites,
which differ slightly from the
requirements for outdoor work sites, in
that employers would need to identify
the work areas where they reasonably
expect employees to be exposed to heat
at or above the initial heat trigger and
then create a monitoring plan to
determine when employees in those
work areas are exposed to heat at or
above the initial and high heat triggers.
Employers could determine which
work areas are expected to have
employee exposure at or above the
initial heat trigger by consulting various
data sources, such as previously
collected monitoring data, site or
process surveys, employee interviews
and input, and heat injury and illness
surveillance data. Work areas near heatgenerating machinery are one example
of where there may be a reasonable
expectation of employee exposure at or
above the initial heat trigger. In addition
to heat-generating equipment,
employers must determine whether
there is a reasonable expectation that an
increase in the outdoor temperature
would increase temperatures in their
indoor work site, thereby exposing
employees to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger.
Employers would be required to
develop a monitoring plan that covers
each work area they identified in the
prior step. The monitoring plan is
intended to determine when employees
are exposed (e.g., specific times of day,
during certain processes, certain months
of the year) to heat at or above the initial
and high heat triggers for each work
area. When developing a monitoring
plan(s), employers would need to take
into account the circumstances that
could impact heat conditions specific to
each work area and work site. The
monitoring plan(s) would need to be
included in the employer’s HIIPP.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
In complying with proposed
paragraph (d)(3)(ii), employers would
need to outline in their monitoring plan
how they will monitor either heat index
or WBGT using on-site monitors that are
set up at or as close as possible to the
work area(s) identified under paragraph
(d)(3)(i). OSHA intends the phrase ‘‘as
close as possible’’ to mean the closest
possible location that won’t otherwise
create inaccurate measurements. The
employer should ensure that their
monitoring plan outlines the
appropriate frequency of measurements,
which should be of sufficient frequency
to determine with reasonable accuracy
employees’ exposure to heat. For
example, if the employer determines
there is only a reasonable expectation
that employees are or may be exposed
to heat at or above the initial heat trigger
when a certain process is happening or
during certain times of the year, then
they would only need to monitor when
that process is happening or during that
time of the year.
Employers using heat index as their
heat metric could either use heat index
monitors or measure temperature and
humidity with separate devices. In the
latter situation, these employers would
need to use a heat index calculator, such
as the one provided on the NWS website
(NWS, 2023), to calculate heat index
from the separate temperature and
humidity readings. Employers using
WBGT as their heat metric would need
to take into account differences in
radiant heat and air movement between
work areas when deciding whether a
single measurement can be used for
multiple work areas. For example,
measurements of WBGT in a work area
without a radiant heat source should not
be applied to another work area that is
near a radiant heat source. Regardless of
which metric they choose to use,
employers should consult user manuals
and ensure devices are calibrated and in
working order. Employers should follow
the device manufacturer’s manual when
conducting monitoring.
If there are multiple work areas where
there is a reasonable expectation that
employees are or may be exposed to
heat at or above the initial heat trigger
at a work site, the employer could
conduct representative sampling instead
of taking measurements at each
individual work area. If using this
approach, the employer would be
required to sample the work area(s)
expected to be the hottest. For example,
this may involve monitoring the work
area closest to a heat-generating process.
The employer cannot put a monitoring
device in a work area known or
expected to be cooler and consider that
representative of other work areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
If any changes occur that could
increase employee exposure to heat (i.e.,
a change in production, processes,
equipment, controls, or a substantial
increase in outdoor temperature which
has the potential to increase heat
exposure indoors), proposed paragraph
(d)(3)(iii) would require that the
employer must evaluate any affected
work area(s) to identify where there is
reasonable expectation that employees
are or may be exposed to heat at or
above the initial heat trigger. Examples
of changes that could increase employee
exposure to heat include the installation
of new equipment that generates heat in
a work area that didn’t previously have
heat-generating equipment or a local
heat wave that increases the heat index
in a warehouse without airconditioning. The employer would be
required to update their monitoring plan
or develop and implement a monitoring
plan, in accordance with paragraph
(d)(3)(ii), to account for any increases in
heat exposure.
Proposed paragraph (d)(3)(iv) would
require employers to involve nonmanagerial employees (and their
representatives, if applicable) in the
determination of which work areas have
a reasonable expectation of exposing
employees to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger (which is described in
paragraph (d)(3)(i)). Employers would
also be required to involve nonmanagerial employees (and their
representatives, if applicable) in
developing and updating the monitoring
plan(s) outlined in paragraph (d)(3)(ii)
through (iii). One example of this
involvement would be employees
providing input in identifying processes
or equipment that give off heat and
times of the day or year when certain
areas of the building feel uncomfortably
hot and warrant monitoring. Employees
are often the most knowledgeable about
the conditions in which they work and
their involvement will help ensure the
accuracy and sufficiency of the
employer’s monitoring plan(s).
Proposed paragraph (d)(4) specifies
that the heat metric (i.e., heat index or
WBGT) that the employer chooses to
monitor determines the applicable
initial and high heat triggers under the
standard. Specifically, as defined in
paragraph (b), if the employer chooses
to monitor heat index, they would be
required to use the initial heat trigger of
80 °F (heat index) and the high heat
trigger of 90 °F (heat index). If the
employer chooses to use WBGT, they
would be required to use the NIOSH
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL) as the
initial heat trigger and the NIOSH
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) as
the high heat trigger. As outlined in
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70777
paragraph (c), the employer would be
required to identify which heat metric
they are monitoring in their HIIPP. If
they do not do this, proposed paragraph
(d)(4) specifies that the initial and high
heat trigger will be based on the heat
index.
Proposed paragraph (d)(5) would
provide an exemption from monitoring
requirements for employers who choose
to assume that their employees are
exposed to heat at or above both the
initial and high heat triggers. In these
cases, employers would not need to
conduct monitoring, but they would be
required to provide all controls outlined
in paragraphs (e) and (f) while making
this assumption. For the period of time
that employers choose to make this
assumption and are therefore exempt
from monitoring requirements, they
would not be required to keep records
of monitoring data (see paragraph (i),
Recordkeeping).
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether the proposed requirement
to monitor outdoor work areas with
‘‘sufficient frequency to determine with
reasonable accuracy employees’
exposure to heat’’ is adequate or
whether the standard should specify an
interval of monitoring (and if so, what
frequency and why);
• Whether OSHA should specify an
interval of monitoring for indoor work
areas (and if so, what frequency and
why);
• Whether the standard should
include a specific increase in outdoor
temperature that would trigger the
requirements in paragraph (d)(3)(iii) for
indoor work areas, rather than the
trigger being a ‘‘substantial increase’’,
and if so, what magnitude of increase;
• Whether there could be situations
in which a lack of cellular service
prevents an employer from using
weather forecasts or real-time
predictions, and if so, what alternatives
would be appropriate;
• Whether the standard should
require specifications related to
monitoring devices (e.g., in accordance
with user manuals, properly calibrated)
and whether the standard should
specify a permissible accuracy level for
monitoring devices; and
• Whether the standard should
further specify which sources of forecast
data employers can use to comply with
paragraph (d)(1)(i) and if so, what
criteria should be used.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70778
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
E. Paragraph (e) Requirements at or
Above the Initial Heat Trigger
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Timing
Paragraph (e) of the proposed
standard would establish requirements
when employees are exposed to heat at
or above the initial heat trigger. As
discussed in Section V.B., Basis for
Initial and High Heat Triggers, OSHA
has preliminarily determined that the
experimental and observational
evidence support that heat index
triggers of 80 °F and 90 °F are highly
sensitive and therefore highly protective
of employees. Exposures at or above the
initial heat trigger, a heat index of 80 °F
or a corresponding wet bulb globe
temperature equal to the NIOSH
Recommended Alert Limit, would
require the employer to provide the
protections outlined in paragraphs (e)(2)
through (10).
The employer would only be required
to provide the specified protections
during the time period when employees
are exposed to heat at or above the
initial heat trigger. In many cases,
employees may only be exposed at or
above the initial heat trigger for part of
their work shift. For example,
employees who work outdoors may
begin work at 9 a.m. and finish work at
5 p.m. If their exposure is below the
initial heat trigger from 9 a.m. until 12
p.m., and at or above the initial heat
trigger from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m., the
employer would only be required to
provide the protections specified in this
paragraph from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Additional protective measures,
outlined in paragraph (f) Requirements
at or above the high heat trigger, would
be required when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the high
heat trigger.
II. Drinking Water
Paragraph (e)(2) of the proposed
standard would establish requirements
for drinking water when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the initial
trigger. The proposed requirements of
paragraph (e)(2) are in addition to the
requirements in existing OSHA
sanitation standards applicable to the
employer, including the general
industry sanitation standard (29 CFR
1910.141); construction industry
sanitation standard (29 CFR 1926.51);
field sanitation standard (29 CFR
1928.110); shipyard employment
sanitation standard (29 CFR 1915.88);
marine terminals sanitation standard (29
CFR 1917.127); and temporary labor
camp standard (29 CFR 1910.142). In
addition to requirements for drinking
water, these standards require access to
toilet facilities, which is important to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
ensure that employees are not
discouraged from drinking adequate
amounts of drinking water. As
discussed in Risk Reduction, Section
V.C., drinking water has been shown to
be an effective intervention for
preventing dehydration, heat strain, and
HRI. It allows employees to replace
fluids lost by sweat and is necessary to
maintain blood volume for
cardiovascular function and
thermoregulation.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(i) would
require that employers provide access to
potable water that is placed in locations
readily accessible to employees. To
ensure employees have sufficient
drinking water whenever needed, the
drinking water should be located as
close as possible to employees, to
facilitate rapid access. Employers could
comply with this provision by providing
water coolers or food grade jugs on
vehicles if drinking water fountains or
taps are not nearby, or by providing
bottled water or refillable water bottles
so that employees always have access to
water. Employers supplying water
through a common source such as a tap
or jug would have to provide a means
for employees to drink the water. This
could include providing disposable
cups or single-user refillable water
bottles. Under OSHA’s sanitation
standards, common drinking cups or
other shared utensils are prohibited.
Open containers such as barrels, pails,
or tanks for drinking water from which
water must be dipped or poured,
whether or not they are fitted with a
cover, are also prohibited under these
standards. In cases where employers
provide single-user, refillable water
bottles, they should keep extra bottles or
disposable cups on hand in case
employees misplace or forget to bring
the bottle the employer provided them.
OSHA notes that water would not be
readily accessible if it is in a location
inaccessible to employees (e.g., the
drinking water fountain is inside a
locked building or trailer). Water would
also not be readily accessible if it is
placed at a distant or inconvenient
location in relation to where employees
work. OSHA expects that employers
will have incentive to place the drinking
water as close to employees as feasible
to minimize the amount of time needed
to access water, which must be paid.
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (j) Requirements
implemented at no cost to employees).
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(ii) would
require that employers provide access to
potable water that is suitably cool. As
discussed in Risk Reduction, Section
V.C., the temperature of drinking water
impacts hydration levels, as cool or cold
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
water has been found to be more
palatable than warm water, thus leading
to higher consumption of cool water and
decreased risk of dehydration.
Additional evidence highlighted in Risk
Reduction, Section V.C., shows that cool
fluid ingestion has beneficial effects for
reducing heat strain. The requirement
that drinking water be ‘‘suitably cool’’ is
consistent with OSHA’s existing field
sanitation standard (29 CFR
1928.110(c)(1)(ii)) and with California’s
heat standard for outdoor workplaces
(Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395).
OSHA has previously stated that to be
suitably cool, the temperature of the
water ‘‘must be low enough to
encourage employees to drink it and to
cool the core body temperature’’ (Field
Sanitation, 52 FR 16050, 16087 (May 1,
1987)). Employers could comply with
this provision by providing drinking
water from a tap or fountain that
maintains a cooler temperature,
providing water in coolers or by
providing ice or ice packs to keep drinks
cool.
In addition to providing palatable and
potable water, the NACOSH Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention Work Group
recommended that employers consider
providing electrolyte supplemental
packets that can be added to water or
electrolyte-containing sports drinks
(NACOSH Working Group on Heat,
2023). While employers could choose to
offer electrolyte supplements or
electrolyte-containing sports drinks,
they would not be required under the
standard. Providing electrolyte
supplements or sports drinks alone
would not meet the proposed
requirement. OSHA has preliminarily
determined that electrolyte
supplementation may not be necessary
in a majority of situations if workers are
consuming adequate and regular meals
(NIOSH, 2017a). OSHA has also
received feedback from stakeholders
that some workers may be unable to
consume certain electrolyte
supplements or solutions due to their
sugar content.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(iii) would
require that employers provide access to
one quart of drinking water per
employee per hour. Employers could
comply with this provision by providing
access to a drinking water tap or
fountain that has a continuous supply of
drinking water, or providing coolers or
jugs that are replenished with water as
the quantity diminishes. As discussed
in more detail in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, that volume of water intake
ensures adequate replenishment of
fluids lost through sweat to avoid a
substantial loss in total body water
content for employees working in the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
heat. OSHA is specifying the amount of
water that employers need to provide to
employees, not an amount that
employees need to drink. However, as
discussed in the Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraphs
(f)(3) and (h), the employer must inform
employees of the importance of drinking
water to prevent HRIs during initial
training, annual refresher training, and
whenever the high heat trigger is met.
Finally, in accordance with paragraph
(j) of the proposed standard, all drinking
water requirements must be
implemented at no cost to employees.
Accordingly, employers may not charge
employees for the drinking water
required by paragraph (e)(2) nor for the
equipment or supplies needed to access
it.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
information on the following:
• Whether OSHA should require a
specific temperature or ranges of
temperature for drinking water as some
State regulations do (e.g., Colorado
requires that drinking water is kept
60 °F or cooler);
• Whether the agency should require
the provision of electrolyte
supplements/solutions in addition to
water;
• Whether the requirement to provide
a minimum of 1 quart per hour per
employee is appropriate; and
• Whether there are any challenges to
providing the required amount of
drinking water (e.g., for employees who
work on foot in remote areas) and, if so,
alternatives that OSHA should consider.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Break Area(s) at Outdoor Work Sites
Paragraph (e)(3) contains the
proposed requirements for outdoor
break areas when temperatures meet or
exceed the initial heat trigger. Adequate
break areas where employees can
hydrate, remove PPE, and cool down is
considered a vital component in
preventing HRIs and necessary part of a
multilayered strategy to control
exposure to high heat. The requirements
for both outdoor and indoor break areas
in this proposed standard are in
addition to employers’ obligations
under OSHA’s sanitation standards (29
CFR 1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127,
1918.95, 1926.51, 1928.110). Because
the sanitation standards address
workplace hazards other than heat
exposure, employers must continue to
comply with their obligations under
those standards. OSHA highlights these
sanitations standards because
employees are likely to eat and drink
water in the indoor break areas, which
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
may implicate certain provisions of
these standards.
Specifically, proposed paragraph
(e)(3) requires employers to provide one
or more employee break areas at outdoor
work sites that can accommodate the
number of employees on break, is
readily accessible to the work area(s)
and has either shade (paragraph
(e)(3)(i)), or air-conditioning if in an
enclosed space (paragraph (e)(3)(ii))). As
explained more in detail in Section
V.C., Risk Reduction, shade reduces
exposure to radiant heat which can
contribute to heat stress and lead to heat
strain and HRI. Further, air-conditioning
is effective in reducing heat stress and
resulting heat strain because it reduces
exposure to heat. Accordingly, OSHA
has preliminarily determined that
requirements for break areas, including
the use of controls to facilitate cooling
while employees are on break, are
effective at preventing HRIs among
workers and should be included in the
proposed standard. This determination
is supported by NIOSH’s criteria for a
recommended standard, several State
standards, and existing guidance (Cal.
Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2024); 7
Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15:3
(2023); Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156
(2024); Or. Admin. R. 437–004–1131
(2024); Wash. Admin. Code 296–307–
09747 (2023); NIOSH, 2016).
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) would
require the employer to ensure the break
area(s) can accommodate all employees
on break. This provision is intended to
ensure that all employees taking rest
breaks that employers would need to
provide under proposed paragraphs
(e)(8) and (f)(2) are able to do so in an
appropriate break area(s). If the break
area cannot accommodate the number of
employees on break, some employees
may not have access to adequate cooling
controls while on break, increasing their
risk of HRIs. In addition, adequate space
allows for ventilation and airflow,
contributing to a more effective cooling.
While OSHA is not proposing a
minimum square footage requirement
per employee, break areas that can only
fit the anticipated number of employees
on break if employees stand shoulder to
shoulder, or in such close proximity
that heat cannot dissipate, would not be
large enough to accommodate the
number of employees on break. Break
areas that are not large enough to allow
employees to move in and out freely or
access necessary amenities, such as
water and air-conditioning or shade,
would also not be considered large
enough to accommodate the number of
employees on break.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) does not
require that the break area(s) be able to
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70779
accommodate an employer’s entire
workforce at the same time. However,
the employer must evaluate the needs of
the work site and ensure the break
area(s) is large enough to accommodate
all employees reasonably expected to be
on break at the same time. When making
this determination, employers would
need to consider factors such as how
many employees are reasonably
expected to be taking breaks to prevent
overheating under proposed paragraph
(e)(8) at any given time, as well as the
breaks required under proposed
paragraph (f)(2) (e.g., are paragraph (f)(2)
breaks staggered or will large groups of
employees be taking them at the same
time?). However, the minimum
frequency and duration of breaks under
paragraph (f)(2) must be met.
Similarly, where an employer has
multiple break areas on-site, OSHA does
not expect each of these multiple break
areas to be able to accommodate an
employer’s entire workforce. Instead,
OSHA expects that employers who
utilize multiple break areas will
determine the number of employees
anticipated to access each break area
and ensure the break areas are sufficient
in size to accommodate the need for
break space in each location. When
making this determination, employers
would need to consider factors such as
the distribution of employees across
different areas and any employee
movement throughout the areas during
a work shift.
OSHA also acknowledges that some
employers may have facilities where
both outdoor and indoor work occurs.
OSHA requests comments on whether
the agency should permit all employees
in these facilities to utilize indoor break
areas.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) would
require that break areas be readily
accessible to the work area(s). It is
important that break areas be readily
accessible to ensure that employees can
take breaks promptly, particularly in
situations where employees are
experiencing early symptoms of HRIs, as
quick access to a break area can help
limit the further progression of illness.
In addition, break areas within close
proximity to employees encourages use.
OSHA does not expect the employer to
have break areas located immediately
adjacent to every employee and
understands that exact distance may
vary depending on factors such as the
size and layout of the workplace, the
number of employees, and the nature of
the work being performed.
Locations that are so far from work
area(s) that they deter employees from
taking breaks would not be considered
readily accessible. When determining
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70780
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the location of the break area(s), the
employer would be expected to evaluate
the duration of travel to the area. Break
areas requiring more than a few minutes
to reach would increase the heat stress
on employees as they walk to the area
and thus not be considered reasonably
accessible. The break area must be
situated close enough to work areas to
minimize the time and effort required
for employees to access it. Break areas
should be as close as possible to
employees so that an employee in
distress could easily access the area to
promptly cool down. OSHA expects that
employers will have incentive to place
the break areas as close as practical to
the work areas to minimize travel time,
which must be paid (see Explanation of
Proposed Requirement for paragraph (j)
Requirements implemented at no cost to
employees).
For mobile work sites, such as in road
construction or utility work, the
employer would be expected to relocate
the break area as needed to ensure it is
readily accessible to employees or
ensure each work site has its own break
area for use. This requirement would
also apply to large work sites where
employees are continually changing
their work area, such as in agricultural
work. The employer would be required
to pay employees their normal rate of
pay for time to get to the break area, as
well as the time on break (see the
Explanation of the Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (j)).
In addition to ensuring the break
area(s) is large enough to accommodate
all employees on break and readily
accessible to the work area(s),
employers would have to provide at
least one of the following: shade
(paragraph (e)(3)(i)); or air-conditioning,
if in an enclosed space (paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)). As discussed above, break
areas are intended to provide employees
a spot to cool down and reduce body
temperature. Also, controls such as
shade and air-conditioning are proven
methods to prevent HRIs. Without
controls such as these in place, break
areas could become uncomfortable and
even continue to expose individuals to
the risk of HRI. OSHA understands that
the scope of the standard includes a
broad variety of outdoor industries, and
that even within one industry,
workplaces can be vastly different. The
proposed requirements for outdoor
break areas give employers flexibility in
their compliance.
Paragraph (e)(3)(i) of the proposal
outlines the requirements for employers
who use shade. The provision would
require that the break area have artificial
shade (e.g., tent, pavilion) or natural
shade (e.g., trees), but not shade from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
equipment, that provides blockage of
direct sunlight and is open to the
outside air. By incorporating shade into
break areas, whether through natural
foliage, awnings, or umbrellas,
employees are able to reduce exposure
to radiant heat and benefit from
conditions that are more conducive to
increasing evaporative cooling as air
moves across the skin. The benefits of
shaded break areas have also been
recognized by several States and
incorporated into State standards,
including California, Colorado, Oregon,
and Washington (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8,
section 3395 (2024); 7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103–15:3 (2023); Or. Admin. R.
437–002–0156 (2024); Or. Admin. R.
437–004–1131 (2024); Wash. Admin.
Code 296–307–09747 (2023)).
To ensure shade is effective, OSHA
would require the shade to block direct
sunlight for the break area. OSHA does
not expect employers to measure shade
density using shade meters or
solarimeters. As defined under
proposed paragraph (b) Shade means
the blockage of direct sunlight, such that
objects do not cast a shadow in the area
of blocked sunlight. Therefore, verifying
that employees’ shadows are obstructed
from being visible due to the presence
of shade would be sufficient. In
addition, shaded break area(s) must be
open to the outside air. To satisfy this
requirement, the shaded break area must
be sufficiently open to the outside air to
ensure that air movement across the
skin (promoting the evaporation of
sweat) can occur and to prevent the
buildup of humidity and heat that can
become trapped due to limited airflow
and stagnant air. For example, a pop-up
canopy with one enclosed side would
comply with the provisions for a shade
structure; however, a closed trailer
having four sides and a roof would not.
Employers could also incorporate other
cooling measures, such as fans or
misting devices, in their shaded break
area, although the proposed standard
does not require them to do so.
Both portable and fixed shade would
be permitted to comply with the
proposed requirements under (e)(3)(i).
However, as stated above, employers
must ensure shaded break areas remain
readily accessible to employees. At
mobile work sites or work sites where
employee move to various locations
throughout the day, such as, but not
limited to those commonly found in
agriculture, landscaping, forestry, and
utility work, employers would need to
ensure that shade structures are
relocated near the work area as needed
or that natural sources of shade (e.g.,
from trees) are readily available at each
work location. OSHA understands that
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
in some mobile outdoor work
environments shade structures may not
be practical and employers may wish to
utilize the flexibility of shade provided
by large vehicles that are already onsite. Large vehicles such as trucks and
vans which are used to transport
employees or goods to the work site, but
not as part of the work itself could be
used as shade as long as the vehicle is
not running. OSHA is not allowing the
use of equipment used in work process,
such as tractors, for shade due to the
risk of accidental run-overs caused by
the start-up and movement from
operators who are not aware of the
presence of workers nearby.
Additionally, equipment used in work
processes is likely to emit radiant heat
after use, which may impede employee
cooling. However, shade provided by
buildings could be used, provided it is
reasonably accessible to employee work
areas. Additionally, as previously
explained, the break area(s) must be
large enough to accommodate all
employees on break. Therefore,
employers utilizing shade cast by
buildings or trees would need to
consider the path of shade movement
throughout the day to ensure adequate
areas of shade coverage are maintained
and the shade is able to accommodate
all employees on break.
Paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of the proposal
describes the requirements for the use of
air-conditioned break areas.
Specifically, the proposed provision
indicates that a break area could be an
area that has air-conditioning if that area
is in an enclosed space like a trailer,
vehicle, or structure. As with the shaded
areas, the air-conditioned break area
would need to be large enough to
accommodate the number of employees
on rest breaks and be readily available.
The use of air-conditioned spaces is
consistent with State requirements and
existing guidance. In their State
regulations, both Colorado and
Washington include the use of an airconditioned site, such as a vehicle or
structure, as an alternative to providing
shade for employee rest breaks (7 Colo.
Code Regs. section 1103–15:3 (2023);
WA, 2008b; Wash. Admin. Code 296–
307–09747 (2023). It is well established
that the use of air-conditioned spaces
reduces the air temperature employees
are exposed to (NIOSH, 2016).
Employers using air-conditioned
vehicles as a break area would need to
ensure that the vehicle remains readily
available during work periods when the
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded.
For mobile employees, such as delivery
drivers, employers could have
employees take breaks in an airconditioned convenience store,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
restaurant, or similar establishment as
long as all other requirements for break
areas are met.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information whether it should further
specify break area requirements (e.g.,
square footage per employee), and what
those requirements should be. Also,
OSHA seeks additional comments on
break areas where employers have both
indoor and outdoor work areas
including:
• Whether OSHA should maintain
separate break area requirements for
these employees;
• Whether OSHA should allow
outdoor employees in these facilities to
utilize indoor break areas under
paragraph (e)(4); and
• Whether OSHA should limit the use
of indoor break areas to those that are
equipped with air-conditioning.
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of shade,
including:
• Whether OSHA appropriately
defined shade; if not, how should OSHA
define shade for outdoor break areas;
• Whether there are situations where
shade is not protective and should not
be permitted; and in these cases, what
should be required for break areas;
• Whether there are additional
options for shade that are protective, but
which OSHA has not included;
• Whether there are situations when
trees are not appropriate for use as
shade and other measures should be
required;
• Whether there are situations when
employers should be permitted to use
equipment as shade; in those situations,
how would employers mitigate other
safety concerns such as run-over
incidents;
• Whether there are situations when
employers should not be able to use
large vehicles as shade or concerns,
including those related to safety, with
generally allowing the use of large
vehicles for shade; and
• Whether there are situations when
artificial shade should not be permitted,
such as during high winds.
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of airconditioned spaces, including:
• Whether OSHA should define or
specify the levels at which airconditioning must operate; and
• Whether OSHA should require that
break rooms and vehicles used for
breaks be pre-cooled prior to the start of
the employee’s break.
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of other
cooling strategies (beside shade and air-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
conditioning) that could be used in
break areas, including:
• Whether there are other control
options that would be both as effective
as shade at reducing heat strain and
feasible to implement;
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding break area
requirements for mobile workers:
• OSHA did not include separate
requirements and seeks additional
information on the feasibility and
effectiveness of the proposed controls
listed under paragraph (e)(3) including
the use of vehicles as a break area; and
• Whether there are control options
OSHA should require for vehicles,
either when used for work activities or
when used as a break area.
IV. Break Area(s) at Indoor Work Sites
Paragraph (e)(4) of the proposed
standard outlines the requirements for
break areas at indoor work sites.
Specifically, it would require that the
employer provide one or more area(s)
for employees to take breaks (e.g., break
room) that is air-conditioned or has
increased air movement and, if
appropriate, de-humidification; can
accommodate the number of employees
on break; and is readily accessible to the
work area(s). As explained above in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (e)(3), the requirements
for both outdoor and indoor break areas
in this proposed standard are in
addition to employers’ obligations
under OSHA’s sanitation standards (29
CFR 1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127,
1918.95, 1926.51, 1928.110).
Information regarding compliance
with the requirements that break area(s)
be large enough to accommodate all
employees on break and readily
accessible can be found in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (e)(3). Break area(s) at
indoor work sites will often likely be
specific rooms in a facility (e.g., a break
room). To ensure that the break areas are
readily accessible, employers would
need to make sure that employees can
enter the break areas for heat-related
breaks (e.g., keep the break room
unlocked).
At indoor work sites, the break area(s)
must be air-conditioned or have a
combination of increased air movement
and, if appropriate, de-humidification.
The importance and effectiveness of airconditioning and air movement in
preventing HRIs were explained above
in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(3).
OSHA is requiring de-humidification, if
appropriate, in addition to increased air
movement because humidity levels
directly impact the body’s ability to cool
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70781
itself through evaporation. Humidity
control is integrated into modern airconditioning units and therefore OSHA
is only requiring de-humidification to
be implemented in high temperature
and high humidity environments when
employers are relying on increased air
movement to comply with this
requirement. To determine when dehumidification may be appropriate in
the context of fan use, employers should
consult the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(6).
To comply with the requirements
under proposed paragraph (e)(4),
employers who operate in arid
environments could use evaporative or
‘‘swamp’’ coolers as a form of airconditioning. Note, however, that such
coolers are not effective in humid
environments. It is also important to
note that OSHA is not requiring
employers install a permanent cooling
system. The use of portable airconditioning units or high-powered fans
and portable dehumidifiers in
designated break areas could also be
used to comply with requirements for
break areas under the proposed
standard. As discussed in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (e)(6), fan use when
ambient temperatures exceed 102 °F has
been demonstrated to be harmful under
some conditions and employers must
evaluate humidity levels to determine if
fan use should be avoided.
Under the proposal, indoor break
area(s) do not necessarily need to be
located in a separate room but can be
integrated within the main workspace.
For example, in a manufacturing
facility, there could be a designated
corner or section within the main
production area where employees could
take their breaks. This break area could
be demarcated by partitions, screens, or
signage to distinguish it from the active
work zones and be equipped with fans.
Alternatively, an employer, who is
unable to establish a break area in their
main workroom because of sensitive or
hazardous work equipment or
processes, can establish a break area in
a separate area away from the work
zone, provided that area is readily
accessible to employees. Regardless of
where a break area is located, the break
area must allow employees to cool
down effectively and drink water to
hydrate.
For indoor workplaces that
experience temperatures above the heat
triggers but have employees who spend
part of their time in air-conditioned
control booths or control rooms and part
of their time in other, hotter areas of the
facility, the employer could utilize the
control booth/room as a break area and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70782
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
would not need to provide a separate
break area for those employees. Control
booths/rooms are commonly found in
industries such as manufacturing, food
processing, electronics assembly,
processing facilities, power plants,
water treatment plants, and more.
Furthermore, these spaces would
qualify as break areas for other
employees provided that the
requirements for size and location are
met. Control booths/rooms that are
locked or have restricted accessibility
would not be acceptable under the
proposal.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of
engineering controls for indoor break
areas, including:
• Whether OSHA should specify how
effective engineering controls need to be
in cooling the break area(s), including
other measures determining
effectiveness beyond temperature and
humidity;
• Whether OSHA should define a
temperature differential between work
areas and break areas; and
• Whether OSHA should specify a
temperature that break areas must be
kept below.
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of other
cooling strategies (besides fans and airconditioning) that could be used in
break areas, including:
• Whether there are other control
options that would be both effective at
reducing heat strain and feasible to
implement.
OSHA did not include an option for
the use of outdoor break areas for indoor
work sites and seeks comment and
information on the use of outdoor break
areas for employees in indoor work
sites, including:
• Whether there are situations where
an outdoor break area could be more
effective at cooling and should be
permitted; and
• Whether certain conditions must be
provided for these outdoor break areas.
OSHA seeks additional comments on
break areas where employers have both
indoor and outdoor work areas. See
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
paragraph (e)(3), Requests for
Comments.
V. Indoor Work Area Controls
Paragraph (e)(5) contains the
proposed requirements for indoor work
area controls when temperatures meet
or exceed the initial heat trigger. Indoor
work areas would be required to be
equipped with a combination of
increased air movement and, if
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
appropriate, de-humidification
(paragraph (e)(5)(i)); air-conditioning
(paragraph (e)(5)(ii)); or, in the case of
radiant heat sources, other cooling
measures that effectively reduce
employee exposure to radiant heat in
the work area (paragraph (e)(5)(iii)). The
importance and effectiveness of airconditioning and air movement
(including dehumidification) in
preventing HRIs were explained above
in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraphs (e)(3). In
addition to these, OSHA is permitting
the use of other control measures for
radiant heat sources because these
controls result in less heat being
radiated to employees.
As discussed above in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (d)(3)(i), employers would
be expected to determine which work
areas of indoor work sites, if any, are
reasonably expected to meet or exceed
the initial heat trigger. For work areas at
or above the trigger, such as those near
heat-generating machinery, paragraph
(e)(5) would require employers to
implement work area controls. OSHA
understands that effective control
methods can vary based on workspace
circumstances and the nature of the heat
source and is therefore giving employers
options regarding indoor work area
controls. However, each work area with
exposures at or above the initial heat
trigger would need be to be equipped
with at least one control option.
Additionally, employers could choose
to use a combination of control
measures.
Employers could use increased air
movement (e.g., fans) and, if
appropriate, de-humidification, or airconditioning to cool the work area
under paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (ii).
Under paragraph (e)(5)(i), fans could be
used to increase the air movement in the
work area. Employers could use
overhead ceiling fans, portable floor
fans, or other industrial fans to comply.
Employers could also increase the air
flow using natural ventilation by
opening doors and windows, or vents,
to allow fresh air to flow into the space,
but only when doing so would be
comparable to the use of fans. Natural
ventilation would not be acceptable if it
does not produce air movement
equivalent to a fan, or if the outdoor
temperature is such that natural
ventilation increases the work area
temperature.
Depending on the type of work being
done and the location of employees in
a facility, employers could choose to use
ventilation to cool the entire space or
just those areas where employees are
present. Although paragraph (e)(5) only
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
applies to work areas, it may be more
efficient for the employer to implement
the control for an entire space. With
either strategy, the employer should
consider the facility layout, equipment
placement, and potential obstructions to
ensure optimal airflow when
determining where to place fans. For
example, an employer could use fans to
cool a warehouse by strategically
positioning them near entrances and
exits to create airflow and facilitate the
circulation of fresh air into the
warehouse. Additionally, utilizing highvelocity fans along aisles or in areas
where employees are concentrated can
help dissipate heat and provide a
cooling effect. Conversely, if employees
only work in a discrete area(s) of a
facility, an employer may choose to only
provide fans in those work areas. For
example, the employer could place fans
in the area where employees are
stationed. Adjustable fans or fans with
oscillating features could be used in
those areas to allow employers to direct
airflow where it is most needed.
Additionally, employers could consider
installing overhead fans or mounting
fans on adjustable stands to ensure
optimal coverage and airflow
distribution.
As discussed in the Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(e)(4), employers using fans or relying
on natural ventilation in humid
environments would still be expected to
decrease humidity levels where
appropriate. OSHA is not proposing a
specific temperature or humidity level
be maintained in the work areas;
however, employers should ensure that
the combination of air movement and
humidity level effectively reduces
employees’ heat strain. As discussed in
the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(6),
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that under some conditions, fan use may
be harmful when ambient temperatures
exceed 102 °F and employers must
evaluate humidity levels to determine if
fan use is harmful when temperatures
reach this threshold. Employers should
consult the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(6) to
determine when de-humidification may
be appropriate in the context of fan use.
Under paragraph (e)(5)(ii) employers
could use air-conditioning to meet the
requirement for controlling heat
exposures in indoor work areas. In arid
environments, evaporative coolers, also
known as ‘‘swamp coolers,’’ could be
used and would be considered airconditioners, even if portable. It is
important to note that while an
employer may choose to provide airconditioning to the entire facility, they
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
would not be required to do so under
the proposed standard. Employers who
choose to provide air-conditioning
under paragraph (e)(5)(ii) would only
need to implement it in areas where
employees work and are exposed to
temperatures above the initial heat
trigger. Similar to fan use, if employees
only work from fixed or designated
locations in the workplace, the
employer would only need to provide
air-conditioning to those spaces under
paragraph (e)(5)(ii). For example, if
employees work only from a control
booth or control room, employers could
choose to install air-conditioning in the
control booth or control room to comply
with paragraph (e)(5)(ii). Similarly,
portable air-conditioning units could be
used throughout the facility to cool
smaller areas where employees work.
For example, an employer could
position portable evaporative coolers
near the entrance of a loading dock to
provide immediate relief from the heat
when an employee is loading or
unloading goods inside the building, or
a machine shop may choose to use
portable air-conditioners around the
workstation to cool the employee.
Alternatively, a manufacturing facility
may choose to install a small, airconditioned control booth for operators
to work from. All of these options
would be acceptable under the proposal.
Under paragraph (e)(5)(iii), in indoor
work areas with radiant heat sources,
employers could choose to implement
other measures that effectively reduce
employee exposure to radiant heat in
the workplace. Paragraph (e)(5)(iii)
would allow the use of controls such as
shielding or barriers, isolation, or other
measures that effectively reduce
employee exposure to radiant heat, in
areas where employees are exposed to
radiant heat created by heat-generating
processes. The use of control methods
for radiant heat is consistent with
guidance issued by Minnesota regarding
the implementation of their heat
standard (MNOSHA, 2009). Options for
complying with this proposed provision
could include installing shielding or
barriers that are radiant-reflecting to
reduce the amount of radiant heat to
which employees would otherwise be
exposed; isolating the source of radiant
heat, such as using thermal insulation
on hot pipes and surfaces; increasing
the distance between employees and the
heat source; and modifying the hot
process or operation.
If the employer chooses to utilize
radiant heat controls under paragraph
(e)(5)(iii) in lieu of air-conditioning or
fan use, the controls would need to
effectively reduce employee exposure to
radiant heat. For example, in facilities
with industrial ovens, kilns, or process
heat, employees may be exposed to
radiant heat during loading, unloading,
or maintenance tasks. Installing
shielding around these heat sources can
help protect employees from radiant
heat during these tasks. In another
example, an employer may choose to
install heat-resistant barriers or
insulating materials around welding
stations to contain heat and prevent its
transmission to adjacent work areas.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional
information regarding the use of
engineering controls for indoor work
areas, including:
• Whether the standard should
specify how effective engineering
controls need to be in cooling the work
area(s);
• Whether there are other control
options (besides fan use or airconditioning) that would be both
effective at reducing heat strain and
feasible to implement in cases where
indoor employees are exposed to
ambient heat; and
• Whether there are work areas where
maintaining a high ambient temperature
is necessary for the work process and,
if so, how OSHA should address these
work areas in the standard.
VI. Evaluation of Fan Use
Paragraph (e)(6) of the proposed
standard would require employers using
fans under certain conditions to
determine if fan use is harmful.
Specifically, when ambient
temperatures exceed 102 °F (39.0 °C),
employers using fans to comply with
paragraphs (e)(4) or (5) would be
required to evaluate the humidity levels
at the work site and discontinue the use
of fans if the employer determines that
fan use is harmful.
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, researchers in the past 10
years have increasingly evaluated the
conditions under which fan use
becomes harmful, using both
experimental and modeling approaches.
Most of this work has assumed
individuals are seated and at rest; to
OSHA’s knowledge, only one paper has
evaluated the threshold at which fans
become harmful for individuals
performing physical work (Foster et al.,
2022a). The impact of fans is
determined by both air temperature and
humidity, as well as factors influencing
sweat rates. Researchers have
demonstrated that neither heat index
nor ambient temperature alone can be
used to determine beneficial versus
harmful fan use; instead, ambient
temperature and relative humidity must
both be known (Morris NB et al., 2019;
Foster et al., 2022a).
The 102 °F threshold in proposed
paragraph (e)(6) is derived from Figure
4 of Foster et al. 2022a and represents
the lowest ambient temperature at
which fan use has been demonstrated to
be harmful in the researchers’ model. As
proposed, paragraph (e)(6) does not
specify how employers must make the
determination whether fan use is
harmful above this threshold. However,
using the other results from Figure 4 of
Foster et al. 2022a, OSHA has
developed the following table which
identifies scenarios where the agency
believes fan use would or would not be
harmful:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Fan speed: 3.5 m/s
Ambient temperature
Humidity range: fan use allowed
102.2 °F (39 °C) .................................................
104.0 °F (40 °C) .................................................
105.8 °F (41 °C) .................................................
107.6 °F (42 °C) .................................................
109.4 °F (43 °C) .................................................
111.2 °F (44 °C) .................................................
113.0 °F (45 °C) .................................................
>113.0 °F (>45 °C) .............................................
15–85% ............................................................
20–80% ............................................................
30–65% ............................................................
30–65% ............................................................
35–60% ............................................................
35–55% ............................................................
40–55% ............................................................
Discontinue all fan use .....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70783
Humidity range: turn off fans
<15% or >85%.
<20% or >80%.
<30% or >65%.
<30% or >65%.
<35% or >60%.
<35% or >55%.
<40% or >55%.
Discontinue all fan use.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70784
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Using the information from this table,
an employer could identify the row
most closely matching the ambient
temperature of the work or break area
and then find the corresponding
humidity range for when fans are
acceptable to use. For example, if the
ambient temperature of the work or
break area is 104 °F and the relative
humidity is 50%, fans could be used.
However, if the ambient temperature of
the work or break area is 108 °F and the
relative humidity is 70%, fans should
not be used.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA recognizes that there are
several limitations with the analyses by
Foster et al. 2022a, and the application
of those results for this purpose. For
one, the model results reported by
Foster et al. assume ‘‘light clothing’’
only and not ‘‘work clothing,’’ which
would be more similar to a typical work
uniform than the ‘‘light clothing.’’ While
the empirical evidence that the
researchers collected on individuals
wearing ‘‘work clothing’’ is largely
consistent with the modeled results
presented for ‘‘light clothing,’’ there are
some differences, such as the finding
that fans are never beneficial at or above
an ambient temperature of 45 °C
(113.0 °F) when wearing ‘‘work
clothing’’ (which OSHA has reflected in
the table). The authors’
recommendations for fan use also
included a category that represented
scenarios in which fans have a
‘‘minimal impact’’ (i.e., the effect of fans
on body heat storage is close to zero).
OSHA has combined this category with
the category for scenarios in which fans
are beneficial to produce the table
above. Another limitation is the
assumption of a sweat rate of
approximately 1 liter per hour (the
group average from empirical trials in
the same study). However, factors such
as acclimatization status, age, and
medical history can influence sweat
rates, which would influence when fan
use is beneficial (see Figure 6 [panels a
and b] from Foster et al., 2022a). Finally,
Foster et al. tested a fan with a velocity
of 3.5 meters per second. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this is a
reasonable assumption but
acknowledges that varying wind
velocity would also influence when fan
use is beneficial (see Figure 6 [panel c]
from Foster et al., 2022a).
OSHA understands the complexity
and uncertainty around an evaluation of
fan use and is therefore considering a
simplified approach for employers to
use. OSHA is requesting comments on
this simplified approach and the
assumptions underlying it.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
More specifically, OSHA requests
comments regarding its preliminary
determinations on fan use and seeks the
following information:
• Whether OSHA has appropriately
derived recommendations for fan use
from Foster et al., 2022a, and whether
additional data or research should be
used to supplement or revise the
recommendations;
• Whether OSHA should include the
above table derived from Foster et al.,
2022a, or a similar table, in paragraph
(e)(6), either as a mandatory
requirement or as a compliance option;
and,
• Whether the standard should
require alternative methods for cooling
employees when fans are harmful, and
if so, what alternative control measures
should be used.
VII. Acclimatization
Paragraph (e)(7) of the proposed
standard would establish requirements
to protect new and returning employees
who are not acclimatized. Evidence
indicates that new and returning
employees are at increased risk for HRIs.
As explained in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, employees who are new on
the job are often overrepresented in HRI
and heat-related fatality reports.
Additionally, the NACOSH Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention Work Group
recommended acclimatization
protections for new and returning
employees, such as heightened
monitoring (NACOSH Working Group
on Heat, 2023), and NIOSH recommends
an acclimatization plan that gradually
increases new employees’ work in the
heat starting with 20% of the usual
work duration and increasing by no
more than 20% on each subsequent day
(NIOSH, 2016). For returning
employees, NIOSH recommends an
acclimatization plan that starts with no
more than 50% of the usual work
duration of heat exposure that then
gradually increases on each subsequent
day (NIOSH, 2016). Therefore, OSHA
has preliminarily determined that the
requirements in paragraph (e)(7) are
important for preventing HRIs and
fatalities from occupational heat
exposures among these employees.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i) would
require that employers implement one
of two options for an acclimatization
protocol for new employees during their
first week on the job. The first option
that an employer may choose, under
proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i)(A) (Option
A), is a plan that, at a minimum,
includes the measures required at the
high heat trigger set forth in paragraph
(f), when the heat index is at or above
the initial heat trigger during the
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
employee’s first week of work. Proposed
paragraph (f)(2) requires a minimum 15minute paid rest break at least every two
hours in the break area that meets the
requirements of the proposed standard,
proposed paragraph (f)(3) requires
observation for signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness, and proposed
paragraph (f)(4) requires providing
hazard alerts with specified information
about heat illness prevention and how
to seek help if needed. See the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (f), Requirements at the
high heat trigger, for a detailed
explanation of the requirements of that
section. Option A gives employers
flexibility to choose an option that
works best for their work site while still
making sure that employees are
informed, are under observation, and
receive breaks, all of which will help
better equip employers and employees
to monitor and mitigate the effects of
heat exposure in situations where the
gradual acclimatization option may not
be practical. While this option does not
require gradual exposure, OSHA
believes that, in situations where
gradual exposure may not be practical,
rest breaks, observation, and hazard
alerts will help protect new workers as
they adjust to heat during their first
week of work.
The second option that an employer
may choose, under proposed paragraph
(e)(7)(i)(B) (Option B), would require a
gradual exposure to the heat at or above
the initial heat trigger to allow for
acclimatization to the heat conditions of
the workplace. The gradual exposure
protocol would involve restricting
employee exposure to heat to no more
than 20% of a normal work shift
exposure duration on the first day of
work and increasing exposure by 20%
of the work shift exposure duration on
each subsequent day from day 2 through
4. This is consistent with NIOSH’s
recommended acclimatization plan for
new employees (NIOSH, 2016).
Employers may satisfy Option B
requirements by utilizing some of the
employees’ work time in ways that do
not require exposure to heat at or above
the initial heat trigger. Examples
include completing training activities or
filling out work-related paperwork in an
air-conditioned building. Employers
may also fulfill this requirement
through task replacement, whereby an
employee completes another necessary
task in an area that does not require
exposure at or above the initial heat
trigger (e.g., office work).
Additionally, if the temperature of the
work site fluctuates such that the initial
heat trigger is only exceeded for a
portion (e.g., 2 hours) of the work shift
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
on some or all of the days during the
initial week of work, employers
choosing Option A would only be
required to implement the requirements
of paragraph (f) during those time
periods. If they choose the gradual heat
exposure option for acclimatization,
employers would need to coordinate the
employees’ heat exposure for those days
with the parts of the day that are
expected to meet or exceed the initial
heat trigger.
Under proposed paragraph (j),
employers would be required to
implement the acclimatization protocols
at no cost to employees. This means that
employers could not relieve employees
from duty after the allotted time of heat
exposure under the acclimatization
protocol and not pay them for the
remainder of the work shift. Because
benefits would also be considered
compensation, this would mean that an
employer could not use an employee’s
paid leave to cover the hours not
worked during the acclimatization
period.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(ii) would
require that employers implement one
of two options for an acclimatization
protocol for returning employees who
have been away from the job for more
than 14 days, during their first week
back on the job.
The first option that an employer may
choose, under proposed paragraph
(e)(7)(ii)(A) (Option A), is an employerdeveloped plan, that at a minimum,
includes the measures that would be
required under proposed paragraph (f)
whenever the initial heat trigger is met
or exceeded, during the employee’s first
week of returning to work. See
explanation above for new employees
and the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (f),
Requirements at the High Heat Trigger,
of the proposed standard for a detailed
explanation of the requirements of that
section.
The second option that an employer
may choose under proposed paragraph
(e)(7)(ii)(B) (Option B), is a protocol that
requires a gradual exposure to heat at or
above the initial heat trigger to allow for
acclimatization to the heat conditions of
the workplace. The gradual exposure
protocol would restrict employee
exposure to heat to no more than 50%
of a normal work shift exposure
duration on the first day of work, 60%
on the second day of work, and 80% of
the third day of work. This is consistent
with NIOSH’s recommended
acclimatization plan for returning
employees (NIOSH, 2016). Employers
may satisfy these requirements by
utilizing employees’ work time in ways
that do not require heat exposure at or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
above the initial heat trigger, as
described above for new employees.
For occupations where returning
employees may have shift schedules
such as two weeks on and then two
weeks off, the acclimatization protocol
requirement would not go into effect
because the two weeks off would not
exceed 14 days. However, in situations
where time off exceeds 14 days, the
requirement would apply.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(iii) would
set forth an exception to acclimatization
requirements of paragraphs (e)(7)(i) and
(ii) if the employer can demonstrate that
the employee consistently worked
under the same or similar conditions as
the employer’s working conditions
within the previous 14 days. Same or
similar conditions means that new
employees must have been doing work
tasks that are similar or higher in level
of exertion to the tasks that are required
in the new job and that they conducted
these tasks in similar or hotter heat
conditions than the new job (e.g., at or
above the heat index for current
conditions in the new job). Employers
should not assume that employees who
recently came from climates that are
perceived to be similar or hotter (e.g.,
Mexico) were actually exposed to
similar or hotter conditions because
climate can vary dramatically based on
factors such as elevation levels and
humidity. Therefore, employers could
check weather records to determine heat
indices for the location that the
employee worked at during the previous
two weeks to determine if the employee
was actually exposed to conditions at
least as hot as in the new position.
In determining if tasks the employee
conducted in the past two weeks were
similar or higher in level of exertion to
the tasks that are required in the new
job, employers could generally consider
factors such as weight carried and
intensity of activity (e.g., walking versus
climbing). For example, picking
tomatoes and picking watermelons
would generally not be considered
similar tasks because of the heavier
weight of the watermelons. However,
picking tomatoes and picking
cucumbers could generally be
considered similar tasks if other job
conditions are similar. Installing
telephone wires on poles and laying out
communication wires in a trench dug
using machinery would generally not be
considered similar to laying out
communication wires in a trench dug
manually because of the greater work
intensity involved with digging a trench
manually. Laying communication wire
in a pre-dug trench and conducting
inspections on the ground might be
considered similar tasks if both tasks
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70785
primarily involve walking. Landscaping
work involving weeding and laying out
mulch versus hand digging trenches for
drainage systems would generally not be
considered similar tasks because of the
greater work involved in digging
trenches. However, hand digging
trenches for drainage and hand digging
holes to install trees and shrubs could
generally be considered similar tasks if
those are the primary tasked performed
throughout the workday.
The employee must have engaged in
similar work activities in the similar
heat conditions consistently over the
preceding 14 days. OSHA intends
‘‘consistently’’ to mean the employee
engaged in the task for at least two
hours per day on a majority of the
preceding 14 days. This aligns with
recommendations from NIOSH (NIOSH,
2016).
Examples of when this exception
would not apply include when new
employees’ previous positions, which
included similar heat conditions and
exertion levels, ended longer than 14
days ago, when new employees’
previous positions ended within the last
14 days and involved similar work tasks
but in cooler conditions, or when new
employees’ previous positions ended
within the last 14 days and involved
hotter conditions but less exertion. The
exemption would also not apply if new
employees’ previous positions ended
less than 14 days ago but they were not
performing similar work tasks in similar
heat conditions for at least two hours
per day on a majority of the preceding
14 days.
To demonstrate that a new employee
consistently worked under the same or
similar conditions as the employer’s
working conditions within the prior 14
days, the employer could obtain
information directly from the new
employee to confirm the requirements
of proposed paragraph (e)(7) are met
considering the explanation of same or
similar working conditions provided
above. The employer could ask
questions verbally or in writing about
the prior work (i.e., timing, location,
duration, type of work). If an employer
asked new employees ‘‘in the past 14
days, did you consistently work under
the same or similar conditions as the
employer’’ but did not ask for any
supporting details, the requirement
would not be satisfied.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Data or examples of successful
implementation of an acclimatization
program;
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70786
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
• Whether the term ‘‘same or similar
conditions’’ is sufficiently clear so that
employers know when the exception to
the acclimatization requirement would
apply for new employees, and if not,
how should OSHA clarify the
requirement;
• Whether a minimum amount of
heat exposure to achieve acclimatization
should be specified under Option B, the
gradual acclimatization option;
• Whether the requirement to
demonstrate that an employee
consistently worked under the same or
similar conditions as the employer’s
working conditions within the prior 14
days is sufficiently clear, and if not,
how should OSHA clarify the
requirement;
• Whether the standard should
require acclimatization protocols during
local heat waves, and if so, how OSHA
should define heat waves;
• Whether the standard should
require annual acclimatization of all
employees at the beginning of each heat
season (e.g., the first hot week of the
year) and approaches for doing so;
• Examples that OSHA should
consider of acclimatization protocols for
industries or occupations where it may
not be appropriate for an employee to
conduct heat-exposed work tasks during
the first week on the job (e.g., what
activities would be appropriate for these
workers to achieve acclimatization);
• Data or examples that OSHA should
consider in determining if
acclimatization should be required in
certain situations for existing employees
and examples of successful
acclimatization programs for such
employees;
• Which option (i.e., following
requirements of the high heat trigger or
gradual increase in exposure to work in
heat) presented in the proposal would
employers implement and whether the
standard should include other options;
• Whether the standard should
include any additional acclimatization
requirements for employees returning
after less than 14 days away from work
after acute illnesses that may put them
at increased risk of heat-related illness
(i.e., illnesses involving fever or
gastrointestinal infections), and if so,
suggestions and evidence for the
additional requirements; and
• Considering that employees starting
or returning when the heat index is
above 90 °F would not receive unique
acclimatization benefits if the employer
chose Option A, whether the standard
should specify additional requirements
for these scenarios, such as breaks that
are more frequent or of longer duration.
OSHA has concerns that the proposed
exception in paragraph (e)(7)(iii) could
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
create incentives for employees to lie
and/or employers to pressure employees
to lie about their acclimatization status.
For example, an employer could
pressure an employee to report that they
consistently worked under the same or
similar conditions within the prior 14
days, so that the employer does not
need to comply with paragraph (e)(7)
during the employee’s first week on the
job. These incentives could put new and
returning employees at increased risk
because they are not receiving
appropriate protection based on their
acclimatization status. OSHA seeks
comments and evidence on the
likelihood of this happening and what
OSHA could do to address these
potential troubling incentives.
VIII. Rest Breaks if Needed
Proposed paragraph (e)(8) would
require employers to allow and
encourage employees to take paid rest
breaks in break areas that would be
required under paragraphs (e)(3) or (4)
if needed to prevent overheating. As
discussed in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, rest breaks have been shown
to be an effective intervention for
preventing HRI by allowing employees
to reduce their work rate and body
temperature. Rest breaks allow
employees time to hydrate and cool
down in areas that are shaded, airconditioned, or cooled with other
measures. Therefore, OSHA preliminary
finds that allowing employees to take
rest breaks when they are needed to
prevent overheating is an important
control for preventing or reducing HRIs
in the workplace.
Providing employees the opportunity
to take unscheduled rest breaks to
prevent overheating helps to account for
protecting employees who vary in
susceptibility to HRI and address
scenarios where employees might
experience increased heat strain. For
example, unscheduled rest breaks may
help to protect employees who are more
susceptible to HRI for reasons such as
chronic health conditions, recent
recovery from illness, pregnancy, prior
heat-related illness, or use of certain
medications (see Section IV.O., Factors
that Affect Risk for Heat-Related Health
Effects). Unscheduled rest breaks may
also help reduce heat strain in
employees who are assigned new job
tasks that are more strenuous than the
tasks they were performing.
Additionally, rest breaks would allow
employees an opportunity to remove
any PPE that may be contributing to
heat strain.
Under proposed paragraph (e)(8),
employees would be allowed to decide
on the timing and frequency of
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
unscheduled rest breaks to prevent
overheating. However, unscheduled rest
breaks must be heat-related (i.e., only if
needed to prevent overheating). In
addition, if the work process is such
that allowing employees to leave their
work station at their election would
present a hazard to the employee or
others, or if it would result in harm to
the employer’s equipment or product,
the employer could require the
employee to notify a supervisor and
wait to be relieved, provided a
supervisor is immediately available and
relieves the employee as quickly as
possible.
An example of a scenario where an
employee may decide they need a rest
break is if the employee experiences
certain symptoms that suggests the
employee is suffering from excessive
heat strain but does not have an HRI
that would need to be addressed under
proposed paragraph (g)(2) (e.g.,
excessive thirst, excessive sweating, or a
general feeling of unwellness that the
employee attributes to heat exposure).
However, rest breaks to prevent
overheating do not need to be tied to
onset of symptoms. For example, if an
employee starts to have trouble
performing a task on a hot day that they
do not normally have trouble
performing, that may be a sign they
need a break. OSHA expects that most
unscheduled rest breaks to prevent
overheating would typically last less
than 15 minutes. In some cases, a rest
break that extends beyond 15 minutes or
frequent unscheduled rest breaks may
be a sign that the employee may be
experiencing an HRI.
As noted, proposed paragraph (e)(8)
requires employers to both encourage
and allow employees to take a paid rest
break if needed. Employers can
encourage employees to take rest breaks
by periodically reminding them of that
option. Although employers must allow
employees to take breaks if the
employee determines one is needed,
nothing precludes an employer from
asking or directing an employee to take
an unscheduled paid rest break if the
employer notices signs of excessive heat
strain in an employee.
Slowing the pace of work would not
be considered a rest break, and as
specified in proposed paragraph (e)(8),
rest breaks if needed must be provided
in break areas required under paragraph
(e)(3) or (4) (see Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraphs
(e)(3), Break area(s) at outdoor work
sites and (e)(4), Break area(s) at indoor
work sites for additional discussion of
break areas and Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
(f)(2), Rest breaks, for additional
discussion related to rest breaks.)
Proposed paragraph (e)(8) would
require that employees be paid during
the time they take rest breaks needed to
prevent overheating. OSHA preliminary
finds it is important that these breaks be
paid so that employees are not
discouraged from taking them. The
reason for requiring these breaks be paid
is further explained in the Explanation
of Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(j), Requirements implemented at no
cost to employees, including the
importance of the requirement and how
employers can ensure that employees
are compensated to ensure they are not
financially penalized for taking breaks
that would be allowed or required under
the proposed standard.
Evidence indicates that employees are
often reluctant to take breaks and thus,
are not likely to abuse the right to take
rest breaks if needed to prevent
overheating; to the contrary, the
evidence shows that employees are
more likely to continue working when
they should take a rest break to prevent
overheating. A review of the evidence
showing that many employees are
reluctant to take rest breaks is included
in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (f)(2) Rest
breaks.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and
information on the proposed
requirement to provide employees with
rest breaks if needed to prevent
overheating, including:
• If there are specific signs or
symptoms that indicate employees need
a rest break to prevent overheating;
• If employers currently offer rest
breaks if needed to prevent overheating,
and if so, whether employees take rest
breaks when needed to prevent
overheating;
• The typical duration of needed rest
breaks taken to prevent overheating; and
• Any challenges to providing rest
breaks if needed to prevent overheating.
In addition, OSHA encourages
stakeholders to provide information and
comments on the questions regarding
compensation of employees during rest
breaks in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (j),
Requirements implemented at no cost to
employees.
IX. Effective Communication
Paragraph (e)(9) of the proposed
standard establishes requirements for
effective communication at the initial
heat trigger. Early detection and
treatment of heat-related illness is
critical to preventing the development
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
of potentially fatal heat-related
conditions, such as heat stroke (see
Section V., Health Effects). Effective
two-way communication provides a
mechanism for education and
notification of heat-related hazards so
that appropriate precautions can be
taken. It also provides a way for
employees to communicate with the
employer about signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness, as well as
appropriate response measures (e.g.,
first aid, emergency response).
The NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group recommended
that elements of a proposed standard for
prevention of HRIs address
communication needs to meet the
objective of monitoring the work site to
accurately assess conditions and apply
controls based on those conditions. The
Work Group recommended addressing
communications needs for tracking to
facilitate monitoring and check-ins so
that employees can report back to
employers (NACOSH Working Group on
Heat, 2023).
OSHA preliminarily finds that twoway, regular communication is a critical
element of HRI prevention. Paragraph
(e)(9) requires the employer maintain
effective, two-way communication with
employees and regularly communicate
with employees. The means of
communication must be effective. In
some cases, voice (or hand signals) may
be effective, but if that is not effective
at a particular workplace (e.g., if
employees are not close together and/or
not near a supervisor), then electronic
means may be needed to maintain
effective communication (e.g., handheld
transceiver, phone, or radio). If the
employer is communicating with
employees by electronic means, the
employer must respond in a timely
manner for communication to be
effective (e.g., providing a phone
number for employees to call would not
be effective if no one answers or
responds in a timely manner).
The means of communication must
also be ‘‘two-way’’ (i.e., a way for the
employer to communicate with
employees, and for employees to
communicate with the employer). This
is important because this provides a
means for employees to reach the
employer when someone is exhibiting
the signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness.
Paragraph (e)(9) also requires that
employers regularly communicate with
employees. The employer could comply
with this requirement by regularly
reaching out to employees, or setting up
a system by which employees are
required to make contact, or check in,
with the employer. However, it is the
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70787
employer’s responsibility to ensure that
regular communication is maintained
with employees (e.g., every few hours).
If a system is chosen whereby the
employer requires employees to initiate
communication with the employer, and
if the employer does not hear from the
employee in a reasonable amount of
time, the employer must reach out to the
employee to ensure that they are not
experiencing heat-related illness
symptoms. Employers must ensure that
when it is necessary for an employee to
leave a message (e.g., text) with the
employer, the employer will respond, if
necessary, in a reasonable amount of
time.
This proposed requirement also
applies for employees who work alone
on the work site. This means that the
communication system chosen by the
employer must allow for
communication between these
employees and the employer, although
the means may be different than for
employees who work on a work site
with multiple employees (e.g., by
electronic means).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• How employers currently
communicate with employees working
alone, including any challenges for
effectively communicating with
employees working alone and any
situations where communication with
employees working alone may not be
feasible; and
• Whether OSHA should specify a
specific time interval at which
employers must communicate with
employees and, if so, what the interval
should be, and the basis for such a
requirement.
X. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Paragraph (e)(10) of the proposed
standard would require employers to
maintain the cooling properties of
cooling PPE if provided to employees.
The proposed standard does not require
employers to provide employees with
cooling PPE. However, if employers do
provide cooling PPE, they must ensure
the PPE’s cooling properties are
maintained at all times during use. It is
critical that employers who provide
cooling PPE maintain the equipment’s
cooling properties; when these
properties are not maintained, the
defective equipment can heighten the
risk of heat injury or illness with
continued use. Reports from employees
indicate that the use of cooling PPE,
such as cooling vests, is burdensome
and increases heat retention once the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70788
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
cooling properties are lost or ice packs
have melted (Chicas et al., 2021).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence as to whether there are any
scenarios in which wearing cooling PPE
is warranted and feasible and OSHA
should require its use.
F. Paragraph (f) Requirements at or
Above the High Heat Trigger
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Timing
Paragraph (f) of the proposed standard
would establish requirements when
employees are exposed to heat at or
above the high heat trigger. As
discussed in Section V.B., Basis for
Initial and High Heat Triggers, OSHA
has preliminarily determined that the
experimental and observational
evidence support that heat index
triggers of 80 °F and 90 °F are highly
sensitive and therefore highly protective
of employees. Exposures at or above the
high heat trigger, a heat index of 90 °F,
or a corresponding wet bulb globe
temperature equal to the NIOSH
Recommended Exposure Limit, would
require the employer to provide the
protections outlined in paragraphs (f)(2)
through (5). These protections would be
in addition to the measures required by
paragraph (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, which remain in
effect after the high heat trigger is met.
The employer would only be required
to provide the protections specified in
paragraph (f) during the time period
when employees are exposed to heat at
or above the high heat trigger. In many
cases, employees may only be exposed
at or above the high heat trigger for part
of their work shift. For example,
employees may begin work at 9 a.m. and
finish work at 5 p.m. If their exposure
is below the high heat trigger from 9
a.m. until 2 p.m., and at or above the
high heat trigger from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.,
the employer would only be required to
provide the protections specified in this
paragraph from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Protective measures outlined in
paragraph (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, would be
required at any time when employees
are exposed to heat at or above the
initial heat trigger.
II. Rest Breaks
Proposed paragraph (f)(2) specifies the
minimum frequency and duration for
rest breaks that would be required (i.e.,
15 minutes every two hours) when the
high heat trigger is met or exceeded and
provides clarification on requirements
for those rest breaks.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Background on the Provision
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, rest breaks have been shown
to be an effective intervention for
preventing HRI by allowing employees
to reduce their work rate and body
temperature. Rest breaks also allow
employees time to hydrate and cool
down in areas that are shaded, airconditioned, or cooled with other
measures. OSHA preliminarily finds
there are at least two reasons that
warrant the inclusion of rest breaks at a
minimum frequency and duration when
the high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
The first is that heat strain is greater in
employees exposed to higher levels of
heat. (See Section IV., Health Effects).
The second is that the available
evidence shows many employees are
not taking adequate or enough rest
breaks. This evidence shows that while
workers paid on a piece-rate basis (e.g.,
compensated based on factors such as
quantity of produce picked, jobs
completed, or products produced) may
be especially reluctant to take breaks
because of financial concerns (Lam et
al., 2013; Mizelle et al., 2022; IglesiasRios et al., 2023; Spector et al., 2015;
Wadsworth et al., 2019), a significant
portion of employees paid on an hourly
basis are also not taking adequate breaks
for other reasons such as pressure from
co-workers or supervisors, high work
demands, or attitudes related to work
ethics (Arnold et al., 2020; Wadsworth
et al., 2019). For example, Langer et al.
(2021) surveyed 507 Latinx California
farmworkers (77% paid hourly) during
the summers of 2014 and 2015, when
California regulations to protect
employees from heat required
employers to provide rest breaks if
needed but did not require rest breaks
at a minimum frequency and duration;
39% of surveyed employees reported
taking fewer than 2 rest breaks (not
including lunch) per day. Additionally,
in a study of 165 legally employed child
Latinx farm employees (64% hourly
workers) ranging in age from 10–17
years in North Carolina, 88% reported
taking breaks in shade, but based on
some interviews, the breaks appeared to
be of short duration (e.g., ‘‘for some five
minutes;’’ ‘‘you can take a break
whenever you want . . . not for a long
time . . . if you wanna get a drink of
water only for a couple of minutes, three
or five’’) (Arnold et al., 2020). The
children who were interviewed by
Arnold et al. (2020) reported pressure to
keep up with the pace of work and
being discouraged to take breaks by coworkers or supervisors. In interviews of
405 migrant farmworkers in Georgia,
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
20% reported taking breaks in the shade
(Fleischer et al., 2013).
In a study of 101 farmworkers (61%
paid hourly) in the Florida/Georgia
region, Luque et al. (2020) reported that
only 23% took breaks in the shade. The
need for breaks was supported by
observations that while some employees
carried water bottles, most were only
seen drinking during rest breaks. In
another study, focus group discussions
with piece-rate farm employees revealed
that many expressed concerns about
possible losses in earnings and that they
might be replaced by another employee
if they took breaks. Many such
employees brought their own water to
work to reduce the time they are not
picking produce (Wadsworth et al.,
2019). In that same study by Wadsworth
et al. (2019), piece rate farmworkers also
described ‘‘their desire to be seen as a
good worker, with great fortitude.’’
Good workers were described by the
farmworkers as those who ‘‘work fast
and do not slow things down and
jeopardize success for the group. They
continue working in spite of the
conditions or how they feel.’’
(Wadsworth et al., 2019, p. 224). A case
study highlighted in the NIOSH criteria
document discusses a migrant
farmworker who died from HRI after he
continued to work despite a supervisor
instructing him to take a break because
he was working slowly (NIOSH 2016,
pp. 46–47). On the day of his death, the
heat index ranged from 86 to 112 °F.
Evidence supporting the need for
required rest breaks is not limited to
farmworkers. For example, a NIOSH
health hazard evaluation (HHE)
indicated that truck drivers for an
airline catering facility often skipped
breaks they were allowed to take
between deliveries in an air-conditioned
room at the catering facility to keep up
with job demands (NIOSH, 2016, p. 44).
Such attitudes appear common in
employees of all sectors. Phan and Beck
(2023) surveyed 107 office workers, and
25–33% of those employees reported
they skipped breaks because of a high
workload, not wanting to lose
momentum, or to reduce the amount of
work to be completed in the future. A
number of informal surveys reported
similar findings for office and remote
workers. In those surveys, many
employees (approximately 40%) skip
some breaks, particularly lunch breaks
(Tork, June 14, 2021; Joblist, July 5,
2022). Common reasons for skipping
lunch breaks included work demands
and feelings of guilt or being judged for
taking a break (Tork, June 14, 2021;
Joblist, July 5, 2022). One survey also
reported that a major reason why many
employees do not take paid time off is
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
because of concerns for coworkers
(Joblist, July 5, 2022). Although these
informal surveys cover employees who
would likely not be covered by the
scope of this proposed standard, these
informal surveys echo the findings of
the studies in the preceding paragraphs
and show that employees generally do
not take rest breaks or other paid time
off.
Studies of presenteeism (i.e., working
while ill or injured) suggest that
employees may be more likely to ignore
signs of excessive heat strain than they
are to take breaks needed to prevent
overheating. Hemp (October 2004, pp.
3–4) stated ‘‘[u]nderlying the research of
presenteeism is the assumption that
employees do not take their jobs lightly,
that most of them need and want to
continue working if they can.’’ Although
financial reasons such as lack of paid
leave are often drivers of presenteeism,
non-financial considerations also play a
major role. One study analyzed
presenteeism in many of the industries
covered by the proposed standard
including in the categories of
agriculture, utilities, manufacturing,
transportation and storage, and
construction (Marklund et al., 2021).
Non-financially related reasons for
presenteeism reported by Marklund et
al. (2021) were not wanting to burden
coworkers, perception that no one else
can do the work, enjoyment of work, not
wanting to be perceived as lazy or
unproductive, and pride. Similar
reasons were reported in other studies
including wanting to spare co-workers
from additional work, pressure from
coworkers, strong teamwork and good
relationships with coworkers, examples
set by management, institutional
loyalty, or a perception that taking time
off is underperformance (Garrow,
February 2016; Lohaus et al., 2022).
The proposed requirement to include
mandatory rest breaks is consistent with
recommendations by authoritative
sources. For example, NIOSH
recommends mandatory rest breaks
(NIOSH, 2016, p. 45; NIOSH, 2017b,
p.1). Additionally, ACGIH (2023) lists
‘‘appropriate breaks with shade’’ as an
essential element of a heat stress
management program. The NACOSH
Working Group on Heat also
recommended that scheduled,
mandatory rest breaks be provided
without retaliation (NACOSH Working
Group on Heat, 2023, pp. 6–7).
OSHA examined a number of studies
to determine an appropriate frequency
and duration of rest breaks. First, a
series of laboratory studies by Notley et
al. (2021; 2022a, b) provide insight on
the appropriate frequency of rest breaks.
In those studies, unacclimatized
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
participants wearing a single clothing
layer exercised at a moderate intensity
level until stay time was reached (i.e.,
core temperatures reached 38 °C
(100.4 °F) or increased by at least 1 °C)
at various ambient temperatures and at
a relative humidity of 35% (Notley et
al., 2021; 2022a, b).1 In a study of
younger (18–30 years old) and older
men (50–70 years old), data from all
participants were pooled to calculate
initial stay times of 111 minutes at
ambient conditions of 34.1 °C (93.4 °F)
(heat index = 93.9 °F) and 44 minutes at
ambient conditions of 41.4 °C (106.5 °F)
(heat index = 119.8 °F) (Notley et al.,
2022b). In a study of unacclimatized
younger men (mean age 22 years), older
men (mean age 58 years), and older men
with diabetes (mean age 60 years) or
hypertension (mean age 61 years),
median stay times were 128 minutes at
36.6 °C (97.9 °F) (heat index = 101.5 °F)
and 68 minutes at 41.1 °C (106.5 °F)
(heat index = 118.5 °F) (Notley et al.,
2021). In a third study, unacclimatized
men and women were able to work for
a median time of 117 minutes at 36.6 °C
(97.9 °F) (heat index = 101.5 °F) and 63
minutes at 41.4 °C (106.5 °F) (heat index
= 119.8 °F) (Notley et al., 2022a).
Overall, the results of these studies
support work times ranging from 111
minutes to 128 minutes at heat indices
of 93.9 °F to 101.5 °F and 44 to 68
minutes at heat indices of 118.5 °F to
119.8 °F.
Two laboratory studies support a
preliminary conclusion that rest breaks
contribute to the protection of workers
from the effects of heat (Uchiyama et al.,
2022; Smallcombe et al., 2022). These
studies were conducted over periods
that could represent all or part of a
workday, with light exertion exercise
conducted under hot conditions (e.g.,
37 ;C (98.6 °F) and 40% relative
humidity (heat index = 106 °F)) in
Uchiyama et al. (2022), and moderate to
heavy exertion exercise conducted
under four conditions: 15 °C (59 °F) and
50% relative humidity (referent group,
heat index not relevant), 35 °C (95 °F)
50% relative humidity (heat index =
105 °F); 40°C (104 °F) and 50% relative
humidity (heat index = 131 °F); and
40 °C (104 °F), and 70% relative
humidity (heat index=161 °F) in
Smallcombe et al. (2022). In both
studies, breaks were provided in airconditioned or cooler areas. The studies
show little evidence of excessive heat
strain in participants as mean core
temperatures remained within 1 °C of
37.5 °C (99.5 °C) (ACGIH, 2023, p. 244).
Uchiyama et al. (2022) evaluated two
work/rest protocols, including one in
which participants exercised for 1 hour,
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70789
rested for 30 minutes, exercised for 1
hour, rested for 15 minutes, and then
exercised for another hour; increases in
mean core temperatures were less than
1 °C above mean baseline temperature
(37.2 °C) in five of the six time points
reported and slightly exceeded a 1 °C
increase at 180 minutes, the final time
point of measurement (38.29 °C). OSHA
finds these work/rest cycles to be
similar to a late morning period of work,
followed by a 30-minute lunch and then
an early afternoon work/rest period,
although acknowledges that the
duration between rest periods is longer
in the proposed rule than in this study.
Also, in the Uchiyama et al. (2022)
study, a lack of heat strain was also
observed in a protocol consisting of 1
hour of work and 15 minutes rest,
followed by three half hour work
periods separated by 10-minute rest
periods and, and a final half hour work
period.
The Smallcombe et al. (2022) study
most closely reflected a typical workday
because it was conducted over a 7-hour
period with cycles of 50-minute work/
10-minute rest and a 1-hour lunch.
Participants were tested under one
referent conditions and three hot
temperature conditions and average
rectal temperature remained at or below
38 °C (100.4 °F) in all groups during
each exercise period at heat indices
ranging from 105 °F to 161 °F (table S2).
Overall, OSHA preliminarily finds
that these studies show that 15-minute
rest breaks would offer more protection
for employees than shorter duration rest
breaks, because the frequency of rest
breaks in these studies by Uchiyama et
al. (2022) and Smallcombe et al. (2022)
was greater than what OSHA is
proposing and rest breaks were
provided in air-conditioned or cooler
areas. OSHA expects some employees
will not have access to air-conditioned
areas during break periods. OSHA
acknowledges uncertainties in
determining a precise rest break
frequency and duration, but
preliminarily concludes that a
minimum of a 15-minute rest break
every two hours would be highly
protective in many circumstances at or
above the high heat trigger, while
offering employers administrative
convenience. For example, other
approaches such as adjusting rest break
frequency and duration based on
weather conditions, work intensity, or
protective clothing are likely to be
difficult for many employers to
implement. A 15-minute break every
two hours is administratively
convenient to implement because, as
explained below, a standard meal break
could qualify as a rest break, and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70790
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
therefore, assuming an 8-hour workday
with a meal break in the middle of the
day, paragraph (f)(2) would only require
two other breaks, one break in the
morning and a second break in the
afternoon, assuming the high heat
trigger is met or exceeded the entire day.
The frequency and duration of these
proposed rest breaks are within the
ranges of frequencies and durations
required by four U.S. States that have
finalized regulations protecting against
HRI by requiring rest breaks under high
heat conditions. First, the California
regulation for outdoor employees
requires a minimum ten-minute rest
period every two hours for agricultural
employees, when temperatures reach or
exceed 95 °F (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8,
section 3395 (2024)). Second and
similarly, the Colorado regulation for
agricultural employees requires a
minimum 10-minute rest period every
two hours under increased risk
conditions that include a temperature at
or above 95 °F (7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103–15:3 (2023)). Third, in
Oregon rules applying to agriculture as
well as indoor and outdoor workplaces,
employers can select from three
different options for work-rest periods at
high heat, including: (1) an employerdesigned program with a minimum of a
10-minute break every two hours at a
heat index of 90 °F or greater and a 15minute break every hour at a heat index
of 100 °F or greater, with possible
increased frequency and duration of
breaks based on PPE use, clothing,
relative humidity, and work intensity;
(2) development of work/rest schedules
based on the approach recommended by
NIOSH (see NIOSH, 2016), or (3) a
simplified rest break schedule that calls
for a 10-minute break every two hours,
with durations and frequencies of rest
breaks increasing with increases in heat
index (Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156
(2024); Or. Admin. R. 437–004–1131
(2024)). Fourth and finally, for outdoor
workplaces, Washington requires a
minimum 10-minute rest period every
two hours at an air temperature at or
above 90 °F and a minimum 15-minute
rest period every hour at an air
temperature at or above 100 °F (Wash.
Admin. Code 296–307–09747 (2023)).
A NIOSH guidance document
recommends work/rest cycles for
employees wearing ‘‘normal clothing’’
that considers temperature adjusted for
humidity levels and cloud cover and
work intensity; in that guidance, when
the need for rest cycles is triggered,
work/rest cycles range from 45 minutes
work/15 minutes rest to 15 minutes
work/45 minutes rest, with extreme
cautioned urged under some conditions
(NIOSH, 2017b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
OSHA acknowledges the
requirements of some States and
recommendations by NIOSH to increase
frequency and duration of rest breaks as
heat conditions increase, but OSHA has
preliminarily decided on a more
simplified approach, in part because of
implementation concerns raised by
stakeholders, such as difficulty in
implementing a more complex approach
(e.g., longer and more frequent rest
breaks with increasing temperature),
and interference with certain types of
work tasks (e.g., continuous production
work and tasks such as pouring concrete
that could be disrupted by more
frequent breaks). In addition, the
requirement to continue providing paid
breaks if needed above the high heat
trigger, coupled with the requirement to
encourage employees to take these
breaks, will help ensure that any
employee that needs an additional break
can take one. However, OSHA
acknowledges that, for the reasons
discussed above, this encouragement
may become more vital as the
temperature increases to ensure that
employees don’t forego the breaks they
are entitled to. OSHA welcomes
comment and data on the
appropriateness of this approach.
B. Complying With Rest Break
Provisions
The required break periods under
paragraph (f)(2) are a minimum. Nothing
in the proposed standard would
preclude employers from providing
longer or more frequent breaks.
Additionally, employers would need to
comply with paragraph (e)(8) (i.e.,
providing rest breaks if needed to
prevent overheating), which may
include situations where employees
need more frequent or longer break
periods. Paragraph (f)(2) requires
employers to ensure that employees
have at least one break that lasts a
minimum of 15 minutes every two
hours when the high heat trigger is met
or exceeded. The requirement is in
addition to employers’ obligation under
paragraph (e)(8) to allow and encourage
rest breaks if needed to prevent
overheating, which continues after the
high heat trigger is met. However, if an
employee takes a rest break under
paragraph (e)(8) that lasts at least 15
consecutive minutes, that would impact
when the employer would next need to
provide a break under paragraph (f)(2).
For example, if the high heat trigger is
exceeded for an entire 8-hour work day,
and the employee takes a 15-minute
break after their first hour of work
because they need one to prevent
overheating, the employer would not be
required to provide another 15-minute
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
break under paragraph (f)(2) for the next
two hours. However, the employer’s ongoing obligation under paragraph (e)(8)
would remain. Employers would also
need to comply with paragraph (g)(2)
(i.e., relieving an employee from duty
when they are experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness).
Under proposed paragraph (f)(2),
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded, employers would be required
to provide a minimum 15-minute paid
rest break at least every two hours in the
break area that would be required under
paragraph (e)(3) or (4). These rest breaks
would be mandatory, and the employer
would need to ensure that rest breaks
are taken as required.
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2) and (e)(8)
would require that employees be paid
during rest breaks. As discussed further
in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (j),
Requirements implemented at no cost to
employees, OSHA finds it important
that employees be paid during the time
they are taking breaks that are
mandatory or needed to prevent
overheating so that employees are not
financially penalized and thus
discouraged from taking advantage of
those protections. See Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph (j)
for Requirements implemented at no
cost to employees for a discussion of
approaches employers can take to
ensure that both hourly employees and
piece rate employees are compensated
for time on rest breaks.
Rest breaks are not the same as
slowing down or pacing. In addition,
performing a sedentary work activity,
even if done in an area that meets the
requirements of a break area under
proposed paragraphs (e)(3) or (4), would
not be considered a rest break under the
proposed standard. This ensures that
employees can rest (thus modulating
increases in heat strain) and hydrate
during that rest break.
OSHA recognizes that providing a rest
break every two hours might be
challenging for some employers.
However, employers could consider
approaches such as staggering employee
break times, within the required twohour period, to ensure that some
employees are always available to
continue working. In other cases,
employers who have concerns about
employee safety, such as having to
climb up and down from high locations
to take a break, might be able to provide
portable shade structures, if safe to use
under the conditions (e.g., elevation,
wind conditions). In addition,
employers could consider scheduling
work tasks during cooler parts of the
day to avoid required rest breaks.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2)(i) indicates
that a meal break that is not required to
be paid under law may count as a rest
break. Whether a meal break must be
paid is governed by other laws,
including State laws. Under the Federal
Fair Labor Standards Act, bona fide
meal periods (typically 30 minutes or
more) generally do not need to be
compensated as work time (see 29 CFR
785.19). The employee must be
completely relieved from duties for the
purpose of eating regular meals.
Furthermore, an employee is not
relieved if they are required to perform
any duties, whether active or inactive,
while eating.
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (iii)
further clarify that total time of the rest
break would not include the time that
employees take to put on and remove
PPE or the time to walk to and from the
break area. OSHA preliminarily finds it
important to exclude this time from the
15-minute rest period so employees
have the full 15 minutes to cool down.
C. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Stakeholders’ experiences with rest
breaks required under law or by the
employer, including successes and
challenges with such approaches;
• Whether there is additional
evidence to support a 15-minute rest
break every 2 hours as effective in
reducing heat strain and preventing
HRIs;
• Whether OSHA should consider an
alternative scheme for the frequency
and/or duration of rest breaks under
paragraph (f)(2). If so, what factors (such
as weather conditions, intensity of work
tasks, or types of clothing/PPE) should
it be based on and why;
• Whether varying frequency and
duration of rest breaks based on factors
such as the heat index would be
administratively difficult for employers
to implement and how any potential
administrative concerns could be
addressed;
• Whether employees could perform
certain sedentary work activities in
areas that meet the proposed
requirements for break areas without
hindering the effectiveness of rest
breaks for preventing HRI, including
examples of activities that would or
would not be acceptable; and
• Whether OSHA should require
removal of PPE that may impair cooling
during rest breaks.
III. Observation for Signs and Symptoms
Paragraph (f)(3) of the proposed
standard would establish requirements
for observing employees for signs and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
symptoms of heat-related illness when
the high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
As explained in Section IV., Health
Effects, heat-related illnesses can
progress to life-threatening conditions if
not treated properly and promptly.
Therefore, it is important to identify the
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness early so appropriate action can
be taken to prevent the condition from
worsening. OSHA preliminarily finds
that observation for signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness in employees is a
critical component of heat injury and
illness prevention.
NIOSH recommends observation for
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness by a fellow worker or supervisor
(NIOSH, 2016). The NACOSH Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention Work
Group also provided recommendations
related to observation for signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness in its
recommendations to OSHA on potential
elements of heat injury and illness
prevention standard. The NACOSH
Work Group recommended that there be
additional requirements for workers
who work alone since a buddy system
is not possible in those cases, including
a communication system with regular
check-ins (NACOSH Working Group on
Heat, 2023).
Paragraph (f)(3) would require that the
employer implement at least one of two
methods of observing employees for
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness, with a third option for
employees who work alone at a work
site. As defined under proposed
paragraph (b), Signs and symptoms of
heat related illness means the
physiological manifestations of a heatrelated illness and includes headache,
nausea, weakness, dizziness, elevated
body temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms.
The first option, under proposed
paragraph (f)(3)(i), that an employer may
choose is to implement a mandatory
buddy system in which co-workers
observe each other. Employers could
satisfy this requirement by pairing
employees as ‘‘buddies’’ to observe each
other for signs and symptoms of heatrelated illness. Co-workers assigned as
buddies would need to be in the same
work area so that it is possible for them
to observe each other. Co-workers could
also use visual cues or signs and/or
verbal communication to communicate
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness to each other.
The second option, under proposed
paragraph (f)(3)(ii), that the employer
may choose is for observation to be
carried out by a supervisor or heat safety
coordinator. If the employer chooses
this option, proposed paragraph (f)(3)(ii)
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70791
specifies that no more than 20
employees can be observed per
supervisor or heat safety coordinator.
OSHA preliminarily finds that it is
important to limit the number of
employees being observed to ensure that
each employee is receiving the amount
of observation needed to determine if
they are experiencing any signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness.
Supervisors or heat safety coordinators
would need to be in a position to
observe the employees they are
responsible for observing for signs and
symptoms (e.g., in close enough
proximity to communicate with and see)
when observing for signs/symptoms.
The supervisor or heat safety
coordinator could have other tasks or
work responsibilities while
implementing the observation role, but
they must be able to be within close
enough proximity to communicate with
and see those they are observing and be
able to check in with the employee
regularly (e.g., every two hours). When
the high heat trigger is met, employers
would still be responsible for meeting
the proposed requirements of paragraph
(e)(9), Effective Communication.
Employees need to have a means of
effective communication with a
supervisor (e.g., phone, radio) and
employers must regularly communicate
with employees at or above both the
initial and high heat triggers.
Because symptoms of heat-related
illness may not be outwardly visible
(e.g., nausea, headache), employers
should ensure employees are asked if
they are experiencing any signs and
symptoms. This is especially true if the
employee shows changes in behavior
such as working more slowly or
dropping things because this could
indicate that the employee is
experiencing heat-related illness but not
recognizing it. It is also important that
employees report any signs and
symptoms they are experiencing or that
they observe in others in order to
prevent development of potentially lifethreatening forms of heat-related illness
(see proposed paragraph (h)(1)(x),
Training). Additionally, as discussed
below, certain signs and symptoms
indicate a heat-related emergency.
Employees who work alone at a work
site do not have a co-worker, supervisor,
or heat safety coordinator present who
can observe them to determine if they
are experiencing signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness. For employees
working alone at a work site, the
employer would instead need to comply
with proposed paragraph (f)(3)(iii) and
maintain a means of effective, two-way
communication with those employees
and make contact with them at least
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70792
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
every two hours. This means that
employers must not only reach out to
lone employees, but also receive a
communication back from the
employees. Receiving communication
back from the employee allows the
employee to report any symptoms. If no
communication is received, this may be
a sign that the employee is having a
problem.
Under proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iv),
employers would be required to train
employees on signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness and which ones
require immediate emergency action.
Proposed paragraph (b) defines signs
and symptoms of a heat emergency as
physiological manifestations of a heatrelated illness that requires emergency
response and includes loss of
consciousness (i.e., fainting, collapse)
with excessive body temperature, which
may or may not be accompanied by
vertigo, nausea, headache, cerebral
dysfunction, or bizarre behavior. This
could also include staggering, vomiting,
acting irrationally or disoriented, having
convulsions, and (even after resting)
having an elevated heart rate. Employer
obligations when an employee is
experiencing signs and symptoms of a
heat-related illness or heat emergency
are addressed under proposed
paragraph (g).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Stakeholders’ experiences with
implementing observational systems
such as those that OSHA is proposing
and examples of the implementation of
other observational systems for signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness
that OSHA should consider;
• Data of the effectiveness of such
observation systems;
• The frequency at which observation
as described in this section should
occur;
• Whether there are alternative
definitions of signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness that OSHA should
consider;
• Whether employers should be able
to select a designee to implement
observation in situations where it may
not be possible to have a supervisor or
heat safety coordinator present;
• Possible logistical concerns
regarding proposed requirements for
communication at least every two hours
for employees who work alone at the
work site; whether there are examples of
successful implementation of these
types of communication systems;
examples of the types of technologies or
modes of communication that most
effectively support this type
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
communication; and whether there are
innovative approaches for keeping
employees working alone safe from HRI
and allowing for prompt response in an
emergency; and
• For employees who work alone at
the work site, whether the employer
should know the location of the
employee at all times.
IV. Hazard Alert
Paragraph (f)(4) of the proposed
standard would require employers to
issue a hazard alert to employees prior
to a work shift or when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the high
heat trigger.
As explained in Section IV., Health
Effects, hazardous heat can lead to
sudden and traumatic injuries and heatrelated illnesses can quickly progress to
life threatening forms if not treated
properly and promptly. To protect
employees, it is not sufficient to
respond to HRIs after they occur.
Prevention of HRIs is critical. A hazard
alert will help prevent HRIs by notifying
employees of heat hazards, providing
information on HRI prevention,
empowering employees to utilize
preventative measures, and providing
practical information about how to
access prevention resources (e.g.,
drinking water, break areas to cool
down) and seek help in case of
emergency.
Heat alert programs have been
identified as important prevention
strategies (NIOSH, 2016; Khogali, 1997).
NIOSH identified heat alert programs as
a strategy to prevent excessive heat
stress and recommended that heat alert
programs be implemented under certain
high heat conditions (NIOSH, 2016, p.
10). NIOSH further describes an
example of an effective heat alert
program, drawing in part on
recommendations described by DukesDobos (1981). Effective elements of a
hazard alert program include similar
elements to the proposed provision
(f)(4), such as ‘‘Establish[ing] criteria for
the declaration of a heat alert’’ and
‘‘Procedures to be followed during the
state of [the] [h]eat [a]lert’’ (e.g.,
reminding employees to drink water)
(NIOSH, 2016, pp. 80–81).
Employees may face pressure or
incentives to work through hazardous
heat which can increase their risk of
heat-related illness; some employees
also may not recognize that they are
developing signs and symptoms of a
heat-related illness (see Section IV.,
Health Effects). The hazard alert
provision would require that employers
provide information about prevention
measures, including employees’ right to
take rest breaks if needed, at the
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
employees’ election, and the rest breaks
required by paragraph (f)(2), which will
empower employees to utilize the
preventative measures available. This
requirement would also enable effective
response in the event of a heat
emergency by requiring employers to
remind employees in advance of its heat
emergency procedures.
OSHA preliminarily finds that the
hazard alert requirement in proposed
paragraph (f)(4) is an important strategy
for the prevention of HRIs. The
provision includes minimum
requirements for the hazard alert and
provides flexibility for employers in
how they implement the provision.
Additionally, employers may choose to
include additional information in the
alert that is appropriate for their work
sites.
Paragraph (f)(4) would require that
prior to the work shift or upon
determining the high heat trigger is met
or exceeded, the employer must notify
employees of specific information
relevant to the prevention of heat
hazards. Specifically, the employer
would be required to notify employees
of the following: the importance of
drinking plenty of water; employees’
right to, at employees’ election, take rest
breaks if needed and the rest breaks
required by paragraph (f)(2); how to seek
help and the procedures to take in a
heat emergency; and for mobile work
sites, information on the location of
break area(s) required by paragraph
(e)(3) or (4) and drinking water required
by paragraph (e)(2). Because the location
of break area(s) and drinking water may
change frequently for mobile work sites,
it is important to make sure employees
at those work sites are reminded of their
location on high heat days. Mobile work
sites include work sites that change as
projects progress or when employees
relocate to a new project (e.g.,
landscaping, construction).
Paragraph (f)(4) would require the
employer to issue the hazard alert prior
to the work shift or upon determining
the high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
However, issuing the alert prior to the
start of the work shift would not be
required unless exposures will be at or
above the high heat trigger at the start
of the work shift. If the start of the work
shift is below the high heat trigger and
the hazard alert is not issued at the start
of the work shift, then the hazard alert
must be issued when the high heat
trigger is met and ideally before
exposure occurs. For example, if a work
shift runs from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and the
high heat trigger is not met until 10
a.m., the employer must either issue the
alert at the beginning of the work shift,
or issue the alert when the high heat
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
trigger is met at 10 a.m. If an employer
regularly communicates with an
employee via a particular means of
communication and uses that form of
communication to issue the alert, then
the employer can presume the
notification was received. If, however,
the employer has reason to believe the
hazard alert was not received, they
would need to take additional steps to
confirm.
Employers could satisfy the
requirements of this provision by
posting signs with the required
information at locations readily
accessible and visible to employees. For
example, some employers may choose
to post signs at the entrance to the work
site. Signs are not an option for all
employers as they may not be sufficient
to ensure employees receive the hazard
alert (e.g., employers with mobile
employees or employees who work
alone on a work site). Additionally,
signs may not be an option for
employers who choose not to provide
the hazard alert at the start of the work
shift. For example, posting a sign at the
entrance to the work site would not be
sufficient to ensure employees are
notified after all employees have already
entered the work site. Employers may
also satisfy the hazard alert notification
requirement by issuing the alert
electronically (e.g., via email, text
message) or through verbal means (e.g.,
an in-person meeting, radio or
voicemail). Employers may be able to
use the system they have in place to
meet the requirements of paragraph
(e)(9) for effective, two-way
communication with employees to issue
the hazard alert.
For any method the employer chooses
to issue the hazard alert notification, the
hazard alert must be sufficient to ensure
all employees are notified of the
information in paragraphs (f)(2)(i)
through (iv). To ensure this, the hazard
alert must be issued in languages and at
a literacy level understood by
employees.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether any additional information
should be required in the hazard alert;
• The frequency of the hazard alert,
particularly in locations that frequently
exceed the high heat trigger; and
• Any alternatives to a hazard alert
requirement that OSHA should
consider.
V. Excessively High Heat Areas
Paragraph (f)(5) of the proposed
standard would require that employers
place warning signs at indoor work
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
areas with ambient temperatures that
regularly exceed 120 °F. The warning
signs must be legible, visible, and
understandable to employees entering
the work area. Specifying the
requirement for warning signs ensures
that all employees and contractors at the
work site are aware of areas with
excessively high heat. Warning signs
signal a hazardous situation that, if not
avoided, could result in death or serious
injury and, if employees need to enter
the areas, serve as a reminder to take
appropriate precautions.
The warning signs must be legible,
visible, and understandable to
employees entering the work areas. The
sign must be in a location that
employees can clearly see before they
enter the excessively high heat area. To
maintain visibility of the warning signs,
employers must ensure that there is
adequate lighting in the area to read the
signs and that the signs are not blocked
by items that would prevent employees
from seeing them. The signs would have
to be legible (e.g., writing or print that
can be read easily). The proposed
standard does not specify contents of
the sign, but signs could include a
signal word such as ‘‘Danger’’, the
hazard (e.g., ‘‘High Heat Area’’), possible
health effects (e.g., May Cause HeatRelated Illness or Death), information
pertaining to who is permitted to access
the area (e.g., Authorized Personnel
Only), and what precautions entrants
would have to take to safely enter the
area. Employees must be able to
understand the signs. Therefore, the
signs must be printed in a language or
languages that all potentially exposed
employees understand. If it is not
practical to provide signs in a language
or languages spoken by all employees,
employers still must ensure all
employees understand what the signs
mean. Employers could do this by
training on what the warning signs
mean and providing those employees
with information regarding the extent of
the hazardous area as indicated on the
signs.
Employers would have to place
warning signs at indoor work areas with
ambient temperatures that regularly
exceed 120 °F. The term ‘‘regularly’’
means a pattern or frequency of
occurrence rather than isolated
incidents. This would mean that the
indoor work areas experience
temperatures exceeding 120 °F on a
frequent or recurring basis, such as daily
during certain seasons or under specific
operational conditions. The process of
identifying heat hazards pursuant to
proposed paragraph (d) may help
employers identify excessively high
heat areas. Under proposed paragraph
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70793
(d)(3), employers would be required to
identify each work area(s) where
employees are reasonably expected to be
exposed to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger and develop a monitoring
plan. If, while monitoring, an employer
determines temperatures in an indoor
work area regularly exceed the 120 °F
threshold, then the employer would
need to ensure that warning signs are
placed at that work area to alert
employees to the potential hazards
associated with such extreme
temperatures.
If an employer’s work site contains an
excessively high heat area(s), the
employer must train employees in the
procedures to follow when working in
these areas (see proposed provision
(h)(1)(xvi)).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether OSHA should further
specify the required location of warning
signs;
• Whether OSHA should specify the
wording/contents of the warning signs;
and
• Whether OSHA should consider
defining ‘‘excessively high heat area’’ as
something other than a work area in
which ambient temperatures regularly
exceed 120 °F; and evidence available to
support a different temperature
threshold or other defining criteria.
G. Paragraph (g) Heat Illness and
Emergency Response and Planning
Paragraph (g) of the proposed
standard would establish requirements
for heat illness and emergency response
and planning. It would require that
employers develop and implement a
heat emergency response plan as part of
their HIIPP, as well as specify what an
employer’s responsibilities would be if
an employee experiences signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness or a
heat emergency. Effective planning and
emergency response measures can
minimize the severity of heat-related
illnesses when they occur and allow for
more efficient access to medical care
when needed.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1) specifies
that the employer would be required to
develop and implement a heat
emergency response plan as part of their
HIIPP and specifies the elements that
would be required in an employer’s
emergency response plan. Because the
emergency response plan is part of the
HIIPP, some of the requirements in
paragraph (c) are relevant to the
emergency response plan. For example,
the employer would need to seek the
input and involvement of non-
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70794
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
managerial employees and their
representatives, if any, in the
development and implementation of the
emergency response plan (see proposed
paragraph (c)(6)). See Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(c), for a detailed explanation of the
requirements that apply to the HIIPP.
Only one plan would be required for
each employer (i.e., for the whole
company). However, if the employer has
multiple work sites that are distinct
from each other, the plan would be
tailored to each work site or type of
work site. For instance, if an employer
has employees engaged in work
activities outdoors on a farm, as well as
employees loading and unloading
product from vehicles at various
locations, the employer could have one
emergency response plan with the
specifications for each of these types of
work sites represented. Employers may
also choose to include other elements in
the plan to account for any work
activities unique to their workplace.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(i) would
require employers to include a list of
emergency phone numbers (e.g., 911,
emergency services) in their emergency
response plan. Indicating the most
appropriate phone number(s) to contact
in the case of an emergency helps
ensure medical support and assistance
are provided timely and efficiently
during a heat emergency. Examples of
other phone numbers for assistance
aside from 911 that employers might
include in the plan are those for on-site
clinicians or nurses to be contacted if an
employee is experiencing signs and
symptoms of a heat-related illness.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(ii) would
require employers to include a
description of how employees can
contact a supervisor and emergency
medical services in their emergency
response plan. Because time is of the
essence in emergency situations, it is
important that employees know
beforehand how to contact a supervisor
and emergency medical services in the
event of a heat emergency. For example,
if employees do not have phone service
or access to a phone to call for medical
help, but they do have access to other
means of communication such as radios,
walkie-talkies, personal locator beacons,
and audio signals, the employer’s plan
would describe how to use these other
means of communication to contact a
supervisor and emergency medical
services.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(iii) would
require the emergency response plan to
include the individual(s) designated to
ensure that heat emergency procedures
are invoked when appropriate. Clearly
assigning this responsibility to an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
individual(s) can reduce confusion and
allow for swift action in the event of a
heat emergency. Employers with
multiple work sites or dispersed work
areas may not be able to ensure heat
emergency procedures are invoked
without designating different
individuals for each work site/area. For
example, an employer with work
activities inside two factories in
different geographic locations would
need to designate an individual(s) to
ensure heat emergency procedures are
invoked at each factory location.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(iv) would
require the emergency response plan to
have a description of how to transport
employees to a place where they can be
reached by an emergency medical
provider. Planning for where employees
can access emergency medical services
can ensure aid is provided efficiently.
This is especially important for
employers with employees engaging in
work activities in remote locations,
where medical services cannot reach
them. For example, an employee
working in an area of a farm not easily
accessible by vehicle or an employee in
a difficult to reach location inside a
building being constructed.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(v) would
require the emergency response plan to
include clear and precise directions to
the work site, including the address of
the work site, which can be provided to
emergency dispatchers. For certain work
sites that are remote/hard to reach or do
not have an address, GPS coordinates
may be necessary to share with
emergency responders, or a description
of how to get to their location from the
main road, entrance, building, etc. If an
employee’s work site changes
frequently, the emergency response plan
would need to include a clear strategy
to account for their changing locations
and ensure directions to the work site
are readily accessible when needed to
provide to emergency dispatchers.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(vi) would
require the emergency response plan to
include procedures for responding to an
employee experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness,
including heat emergency procedures
for responding to an employee with
suspected heat stroke. Prior
development of emergency response
procedures can ensure assistance and
medical attention are provided
efficiently and quickly. In developing
the procedures, OSHA expects that
employers would look to resources such
as OSHA guidance (e.g., www.osha.gov/
heat-exposure/illness-first-aid) and
NIOSH recommendations (NIOSH,
2016) for more information.
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
The proposed standard does not
require employers to develop a plan for
each work site. However, the employer’s
emergency response plan(s) must
contain all the information required by
paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (vi), some of
which will vary based on work site. The
employer may be able to incorporate the
information needed for different work
sites into the same emergency response
plan. For instance, if an employer has
employees engaged in work activities
outdoors on a farm, as well as
employees loading and unloading
product from vehicles at various
locations, the employer could have one
emergency response plan with the
specifications for each of these types of
work sites represented. Employers may
also choose to include elements beyond
those required by paragraphs (g)(1)(i)
through (vi) in their plan to account for
any work activities unique to their
workplace.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2) specifies
the actions employers would be
required to perform if an employee is
experiencing signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness. Under proposed
paragraph (b) signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness means the
physiological manifestations of a heatrelated illness and includes headache,
nausea, weakness, dizziness, elevated
body temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(i) would
require employers to relieve from duty
employees who are experiencing signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness.
Relieving the employee from duty
would allow the employer to address
the heat-related illness according to the
procedures outlined in proposed
paragraphs (g)(2)(ii) through (v). This
relief from duty, including the time it
takes to address the heat-related illness
according to the procedures outlined in
proposed paragraphs (g)(2)(ii) through
(v), must be with pay and must continue
at least until symptoms have subsided.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(ii) would
require that employers monitor
employees who are experiencing signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness,
and proposed paragraph (g)(2)(iii)
would require employers to ensure that
employees who are experiencing signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness are
not left alone. Continuous monitoring of
employees who are experiencing signs
and symptoms of a heat-related illness
is important to ensure that if the
employee’s condition progresses to a
heat emergency, someone is there to
observe it and quickly respond.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(iv) would
require employers to offer employees
who are experiencing signs and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
symptoms of heat-related illness on-site
first aid or medical services before
ending any monitoring. This
requirement is intended to be consistent
with existing first aid standards (e.g. 29
CFR 1910.151, 1915.87, 1926.23 and
1926.50), which require accessibility of
medical services and first aid to varying
degrees depending on the industry or
whether the workplace is near an
infirmary, clinic or hospital. Proposed
paragraph (g)(2)(iv) would not add new
requirements for staff to be fully trained
in first aid. Employers would offer the
first aid or medical resources they have
available to employees on site to the
extent already required by first aid
standards and follow the procedures
developed in paragraph (g)(1)(vi) as
applicable.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(v) would
require employers to provide employees
who are experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness with
means to reduce their body temperature.
Examples of means to reduce body
temperature are instructing those
employees to remove all PPE and heavy
outer clothing (e.g., heavy/impermeable
protective clothing) and moving them to
a cooled or shaded area (e.g., the break
areas required under paragraphs (e)(3)
and (4)) where they can sit and drink
cool water. If the employer has cooling
PPE (e.g., cooling bandanas or neck
wraps, and vests and cooling systems
such as hybrid personal cooling systems
(HPCS), and fans) available on site,
those could also be used to cool
employees as well. (For information
related to the requirement to reduce an
employee’s body temperature in the
case of a heat emergency, see discussion
below.)
Proposed paragraph (g)(3) specifies
the actions employers would have to
perform if an employee is experiencing
signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency. Proposed paragraph (b)
defines signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency as the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
that requires emergency response and
includes loss of consciousness (i.e.,
fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be
accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or
bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting
irrationally or disoriented, having
convulsions, and (even after resting)
having an elevated heart rate.
Proposed paragraph (g)(3)(i) would
require employers to take immediate
actions to reduce the employee’s body
temperature before emergency medical
services arrive. Rapid cooling of body
temperature during a heat emergency is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
essential because the potential for organ
damage and risk of death increase in a
short period of time, often before
medical personnel can respond,
transport, and treat the affected
individual (Belval et al., 2018).
Immersion in ice water or cold water
has been reported to have the fastest
cooling rates (McDermott et al., 2009b;
Casa et al., 2007). However, OSHA
realizes that immersing an employee in
a tub of ice/cold water is not an option
that will be available at most work sites.
Other, more practical methods of
reducing employee body temperature
using materials that employers are likely
to have, or are similar to materials that
an employer is likely to have, on site
have been reported to be highly effective
in preventing death from exertional heat
stroke. DeGroot et al. (2023) reported
survival of 362 of 363 military
personnel who were suffering from
exertional heat stroke and were treated
with strategically placed ‘‘ice sheets’’
(i.e., bed sheets soaked in ice water).
McDermott et al. (2009a) reported 100%
survival in nine marathon runners who
were suffering from exertional heat
stroke and treated by dousing with cold
water and rubbing of ice bags over major
muscle groups. Another possible
approach is the tarp-assisted cooling
oscillation (TACO) method that involves
wrapping the affected individual in a
tarp with ice (Luhring et al., 2016).
Proposed paragraph (g)(3)(ii) would
require employers to contact emergency
medical services immediately for
employees experiencing signs and
symptoms of a heat emergency, and
proposed paragraph (g)(3)(iii) would
require employers to also perform the
activities described in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) through (iv) to aid an employee
during a heat emergency until
emergency medical services arrives.
Some heat-related illnesses can quickly
progress and become fatal (see Section
IV., Health Effects). The severity and
survival of heat stroke is highly
dependent on how quickly effective
cooling and emergency medical services
are provided (Vicario et al., 1986;
Demartini et al., 2015; Belval et al.,
2018).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether OSHA should require a
minimum duration of time an employee
who has experienced signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness must
be relieved from duty, and what an
appropriate duration of time would be
before returning employees to work;
• Whether OSHA should add or
remove any signs or symptoms in the
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70795
definitions of signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness and signs and
symptoms of a heat emergency in
proposed paragraph (b). If so, provide
clear and specific evidence for inclusion
or exclusion;
• Whether paragraph (g)(3)(i) should
require specific actions that the
employer must take to reduce an
employee’s body temperature before
emergency medical services arrive,
rather than merely requiring unspecified
‘‘immediate actions’’. If so, describe
those specific actions; and
• Whether paragraph (g)(3)(i) should
prohibit certain actions to reduce an
employee’s body temperature before
emergency medical services arrive. If so,
indicate if there is evidence or
observations that certain actions are not
helpful or are counterproductive.
H. Paragraph (h) Training
Paragraph (h) of the proposed
standard establishes requirements for
training on HRI prevention. It addresses
the topics to be addressed in training,
the types of employees who are to be
trained, the frequency of training,
triggers for supplemental training, and
how training is to be conducted. OSHA
regularly includes training requirements
in its standards to ensure employees
understand the hazards addressed by
the standard, the protections they are
entitled to under the standard, and the
measures to take to protect themselves.
Here, OSHA believes that it is essential
that employees are trained on heatrelated hazards and how to identify
signs and symptoms of HRIs as well as
on the requirements of the proposed
standard and the employer’s heatrelated policies and procedures. This
training ensures that employees
understand heat hazards and the
workplace specific control measures
that would be implemented to address
the hazard. The effectiveness of the
proposed standard would be
undermined if employees did not have
sufficient knowledge and understanding
to identify heat hazards and their health
effects or sufficient knowledge and
understanding of their employer’s
policies and procedures for addressing
those hazards.
Surveys and interviews with diverse
working populations highlight the need
for additional education and training on
HRIs and prevention strategies amongst
employees (Luque et al., 2020; Smith et
al., 2021; Fleischer at al., 2013;
Stoecklin-Marois et al., 2013; Langer et
al., 2021; Jacklitsch et al., 2018). The
NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group recommended
that both workers and supervisors are
trained in heat illness and injury
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70796
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
prevention strategies. Additionally, the
Work Group recommended that the
training program includes the following
elements: identification of hazards;
mitigation of hazards through
prevention; reporting of signs and
symptoms; and emergency response.
OSHA preliminarily finds that effective
training is an essential element of any
heat injury and illness prevention
program and that the requirements in
proposed paragraph (h) are necessary
and appropriate to ensure the
effectiveness of the standard as a whole.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1) establishes
the initial training requirements for all
exposed employees. It would require
employers to ensure that each employee
receives, and understands, training on
the topics outlined in proposed
paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (xvi) prior
to the employee performing any work at
or above the initial heat trigger.
Requiring that initial training occur
before employees perform any work at
or above the initial heat trigger ensures
that the employees have all the
knowledge necessary to protect
themselves prior to their exposure to the
hazard.
This provision, like paragraphs (h)(2)
through (h)(4), would require employers
to ensure that employees, including
supervisors and heat safety
coordinators, understand the training
topics. While OSHA does not mandate
testing or specific modes of ascertaining
employee understanding of the training
materials, OSHA expects that all
required training will include some
measure of comprehension. Different
ways that employers could ensure
comprehension of the training materials
include a knowledge check (e.g., written
or oral assessment) or discussions after
the training. Post training assessments
may be particularly useful for ensuring
employee participation and
comprehension when employers offer
online training. Proposed paragraph
(h)(5), discussed below, includes
additional requirements for presentation
of the training.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(i) would
require employers to provide training on
heat stress hazards. Heat stress is the
total heat load on the body. There are
three major types of hazards which
contribute to heat stress: (1)
environmental factors such as high
humidity, high temperature, solar
radiation, lack of air movement, and
process heat (i.e., radiant heat produced
by machinery or equipment, such as
ovens and furnaces), (2) use of personal
protective equipment or clothing that
can inhibit the body’s ability to cool
itself, and (3) the body’s metabolic heat
(i.e., heat produced by the body during
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
work involving physical activity and
exertion). Employers should make
employees aware of all the sources of
heat at the workplace that contribute to
heat stress.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(ii) would
require employers to provide training on
heat-related injuries and illnesses. See
Section IV., Health Effects, for a
discussion of HRIs. Examples of heatrelated illnesses include heat stroke,
heat exhaustion, heat cramps, heat
syncope, and rhabdomyolysis. Heatrelated injuries that could result from
heat illness include slips, trips, falls,
and other injuries that could result from
the mishandling of equipment due to
the effects of heat stress.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iii) would
require employers to provide training on
risk factors for heat-related injury or
illness, including the contributions of
physical exertion, clothing, personal
protective equipment, a lack of
acclimatization, and personal risk
factors (e.g., age, health, alcohol
consumption, and use of certain
medications). As noted above, physical
exertion, clothing, and personal
protective equipment all increase an
employee’s heat load. More information
on acclimatization and how it affects
risk is included in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, and more information about
personal risk factors is included in
Section IV.O., Factors that Affect Risk
for Heat-Related Health Effects.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iv) would
require employers to provide training on
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness and which ones require
immediate emergency action. As
defined in proposed paragraph (b), signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness
means the physiological manifestations
of a heat-related illness and includes
headache, nausea, weakness, dizziness,
elevated body temperature, muscle
cramps, and muscle pain or spasms.
Also defined in proposed paragraph (b),
signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
that requires emergency response and
includes loss of consciousness (i.e.,
fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be
accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or
bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting
irrationally or disoriented, having
convulsions, and (even after resting)
having an elevated heart rate. Employers
must train employees on how to identify
these signs and symptoms of heatrelated illness in themselves and their
coworkers and when to employ the
employer’s emergency response
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
procedures, as required under proposed
paragraph (g). That provision specifies
the actions that an employer must take
both when an employee experiences
signs and symptoms of a heat-related
illness and when an employee
experiences signs and symptoms of a
heat emergency. For further discussion
see the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for Paragraph (g).
Proposed paragraphs (h)(1)(v) through
(vii) would require employers to train
employees on the importance of
removing PPE that may impair cooling
during rest breaks, taking rest breaks to
prevent heat-related illness or injury,
and that rest breaks are paid, and
drinking water to prevent heat-related
illness or injury. Removing PPE when
possible, allows employees to cool
down faster during rest breaks. As
discussed in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, drinking adequate amounts
of water and taking rest breaks are
important for reducing heat strain that
could lead to HRI. Training on these
topics could give the employer an
opportunity to address common
misperceptions regarding heat, such as
that drinking cold water in the heat is
harmful. In addition, proposed
paragraph (h)(1)(viii) and (ix) would
require that employers train employees
on where break areas and employer
provided water are located. This would
ensure employees are aware of the
locations of break areas and water and
encourage their effective utilization.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(x) would
require employers to train employees on
the importance of reporting signs and
symptoms of heat-related illnesses that
they experience personally or those they
observe in co-workers. Training
employees to be observant of and to
report early any signs and symptoms of
heat-related illnesses they see at the
workplace is a key factor to identifying
and addressing potential heat-related
incidents before they result in a serious
illness or injury. In addition, employers
should ensure that employees are
familiar with the employer’s own
procedures for reporting signs and
symptoms of a heat emergency or heatrelated illness pursuant to its heat
emergency response plan as required in
proposed paragraph (g).
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xi) would
require employers to train employees on
all the policies and procedures
applicable to the employee’s duties, as
indicated in the work site’s HIIPP.
Employees play an important role in
effective implementation of the
employer’s work site-specific policies
and procedures to prevent heat-related
illnesses and injury, and training on
these policies and procedures is
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
necessary to ensure that they are
implemented effectively. OSHA
recognizes that employees perform
various duties and therefore likely need
different types of training, and the
proposed requirement allows employers
flexibility to account for these
differences in their training programs.
Thus, certain components of the
training may need to be tailored to an
employee’s assigned duties. For
example, while all employees would
require training on recognizing signs
and symptoms of heat-related illness,
employees observing a co-worker as part
of buddy system under proposed
paragraph (f)(3)(i) may require
additional training on how to report
signs and symptoms according to the
policies and procedures established and
implemented by the employer. In
another example, the individual
designated by the employer to ensure
that emergency procedures are invoked
when appropriate under proposed
paragraph (g)(1)(iii) might require more
detailed training on the employer’s heat
emergency response procedures.
Another example could be training
employees who wear vaporimpermeable clothing on the policies
and procedures the employer has
implemented to protect them under
proposed paragraph (c)(3).
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xii) would
require employers to train employees on
the identity of the heat safety
coordinator. Under proposed paragraph
(c)(5), the heat safety coordinator would
be designated to implement and monitor
the HIIPP and would be given authority
to ensure compliance with the HIIPP.
Therefore, employees could contact the
heat safety coordinator to ask questions
about the HIIPP, to provide feedback on
the policies and procedures, or report
possible deficiencies with
implementation of the HIIPP. Employers
should encourage employees to contact
the heat safety coordinator for these
reasons. To ensure that employees are
able to contact the heat safety
coordinator, employers could provide
the name of the individual and other
information needed to contact them as
part of the training required under this
paragraph.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xiii) would
require employers to train employees on
the requirements of this standard. While
proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xi) would
require training on all policies and
procedures applicable to an employee’s
duties as noted in the employer’s HIIPP,
training under (h)(1)(xiii) would ensure
that employees are familiar with all
requirements of this proposed standard.
For example, employees would have to
be informed of the requirements related
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
to employee participation, including in
the development, implementation,
review and update of the HIIPP under
proposed paragraph (c), and identifying
work areas with reasonable expectations
of exposures at or above the initial heat
trigger, and in developing and updating
the monitoring plan under proposed
paragraph (d). Employees would also
need to be informed that requirements
of the proposed standard would be
implemented at no cost to employees
under proposed paragraph (j). The
proposed provision would also ensure
that employees are made familiar with
the employer’s heat-related policies and
procedures.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xiv) would
require employers to train employees on
how to access the work site’s HIIPP. If
relevant this would include training on
how to access both digital or physical
copies.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xv) would
require employers to train employees on
their right to protections under this
standard (e.g., rest breaks, water), and
that employers are prohibited from
discharging or in any manner
discriminating against any employee for
exercising those rights. Employees’ right
to be free from retaliation for availing
themselves of the protections of the
standard or for raising safety concerns
comes from section 11(c) of the OSH
Act, 29 U.S.C. 660(c), and requiring
employers to train on these protections
is consistent with the purpose of that
provision. Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xv)
is also consistent with section 8(c)(1) of
the Act, 29 U.S.C. 657(c)(1), which
directs the Secretary to issue regulations
requiring employers to keep their
employees informed of their protections
under the Act and any applicable
standards, through posting of notices or
‘‘other appropriate means.’’ This
training ensures that employees know
that they have a right to the protections
required by the standard. Having
employers acknowledge and train their
employees about their rights under this
standard provides assurance that
employees are aware of the protections
afforded them and encourages them to
exercise their rights without fear of
reprisal. They may otherwise fear
retaliation for utilizing the protections
afforded them under the standard or for
speaking up about workplace heat
hazard concerns. This fear would
undermine the effectiveness of the
standard because employee
participation plays a central role in
effectuating the standard’s purpose.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xvi) would
require that if the employer is required
under paragraph (f)(5) to place warning
signs for excessively high heat areas,
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70797
they would be required to train
employees on procedures to follow
when working in these areas. These
procedures could include, but are not
limited to, any PPE that might be
required when working in those areas,
if relevant, and reminders to remove
PPE when taking rest breaks in break
areas and should reinforce employees’
access to rest breaks in break areas,
required under paragraph (f)(2), and
drinking water, required under
paragraph (e)(2), as appropriate.
Proposed paragraph (h)(2) would
require the employer to ensure that each
supervisor responsible for supervising
employees performing any work at or
above the initial heat trigger and each
heat safety coordinator receives training
on, and understands, both the topics
outlined in paragraph (h)(1) and the
topics outlined in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)
and (ii). Proposed paragraph (h)(2)(i)
would require the employer to train
supervisors and heat safety coordinators
on the policies and procedures
developed to comply with the
applicable requirements of this
standard, including the policies and
procedures for monitoring heat
conditions developed to comply with
paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(3)(ii).
Proposed paragraph (h)(2)(ii) would
require the employer to train
supervisors and heat safety coordinators
on procedures they would have to
follow if an employee exhibits signs and
symptoms of heat related illness, which
an employer is required to develop for
its HIIPP pursuant to proposed
paragraph (g)(1)(vi). This would ensure
effective and rapid treatment and care
for employees experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness. OSHA
included these proposed provisions to
ensure that supervisors and heat safety
coordinators receive additional training
needed to perform their duties as
specified in the proposed standard.
Proposed paragraph (h)(3) would
require the employer to ensure that each
employee receives annual refresher
training on, and understands, the
subjects addressed in paragraph (h)(1) of
the proposed standard. This paragraph
would also require that each supervisor
and heat safety coordinator additionally
receive annual refresher training on, and
understands, the topics addressed in
paragraph (h)(2). OSHA preliminarily
finds that annual training is needed to
refresh and reinforce an employee’s
recollection and knowledge about the
topics addressed in this paragraph. This
proposed provision also indicates that
for employees who perform work
outdoors, the employer must conduct
the annual refresher training before or at
the start of the heat season. This can
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70798
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
vary depending on the weather
conditions in the geographic region
where the employer is located.
Accordingly, OSHA intends this
requirement to be flexible and to allow
employers leeway to determine the start
of the heat season, so long as those
determinations are reasonable. For
example, in northern States such as
Michigan, employers might find it best
to do annual training before the time
when temperatures commonly reach the
initial heat trigger or above. In those
cases, temperatures are likely to be
below the initial heat trigger for a
substantial portion of the year and
employees are likely to need reminders
of all policies and procedures related to
heat, both for the initial and high heat
triggers. Employers can determine when
heat season is for them based on normal
weather patterns and would be required
to conduct training prior to or at the
start of the heat season. In most
instances, OSHA expects that employers
would do this no sooner than 30 days
before the start of their heat season, so
that employees can recall training
materials easily, rather than for
example, 6-months before the start of
heat season. For new employees at
outdoor work sites, this may result in
some employees receiving the annual
refresher training less than a year after
the initial training.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4) specifies
when supplemental training would be
required. Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(i)
would require the employer to ensure
that employees promptly receive and
understand additional training
whenever changes occur that affect the
employee’s exposure to heat at work
(e.g., new job tasks, relocation to a
different facility or area of a facility).
For example, if an employee is assigned
to a new task or workstation that
exposes them to high process heat or to
outdoor work where the employee is
exposed to hazardous heat, and such
employee was not previously trained on
the necessary topics required under this
paragraph, then the employer would
have to provide that employee with the
requisite training. Similarly, if an
employee is assigned to a new work area
to which different heat-related policies
and procedures apply, they would need
to be trained on these area-specific
policies and procedures. Additional
examples could include when an
employer’s work site experiences heat
waves, when new heat sources are
added to the workplace, or when
employees are assigned to a new task
where they need to wear vaporimpermeable PPE (i.e., non-breathable).
In these instances, the training required
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
under this provision would have to
comport with the requirements of the
rest of this paragraph.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(ii) would
require that each employee promptly
receives, and understands, additional
training whenever changes occur in
policies and procedures addressed in
paragraph (h)(1)(xi) of this proposed
standard. Proposed paragraph (c) would
require employers to monitor their
HIIPP to ensure ongoing effectiveness.
When doing so, the employer may find
that the policies and procedures are
inadequate to protect employees from
heat hazards. If so, the employer would
have to update those policies and
procedures. When this happens,
employers would be required to train all
employees on the new or altered
policies and procedures so that the
employees are aware of the new policies
and procedures and how to follow them
to reduce their risk of developing heatrelated illnesses and injuries.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iii) would
require that each employee promptly
receives, and understands, additional
training whenever there is an indication
that an employee(s) has not retained the
necessary understanding. Examples of
this would include employees who
appear to have forgotten signs and
symptoms of heat-related illnesses or
how to respond when an employee is
experiencing those signs and symptoms.
It is essential that employees remain
familiar with training they have
received so they continue to have the
knowledge and skills needed to protect
themselves and possibly co-workers
from heat hazards. Supplemental
training under paragraph (h)(4)(iii) must
be provided to those employees who
have demonstrated a lack of
understanding or failure to follow the
employer’s heat policies and procedures
or comply with the requirements of this
proposed standard.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iv) would
require that each employee promptly
receives, and understands, additional
training whenever a heat-related injury
or illness occurs at the work site that
results in death, days away from work,
medical treatment beyond first aid, or
loss of consciousness. Occurrences of
these types of heat-related injuries and
illnesses could indicate that one or more
employees are not following policies
and procedures for preventing or
responding to heat-related illnesses and
injuries. After a heat-related illness or
injury in the workplace occurs that
meets the requirements of proposed
paragraph (h)(4)(iv), OSHA expects that
each employee would receive
supplemental training. This training
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
could be a ‘‘lessons learned’’ or ‘‘alert’’
type training.
Both initial and supplemental training
are important components of an
effective heat injury and illness
prevention program. Initial training
provides employees with the knowledge
and skills they need to protect
themselves against heat hazards, and
also emphasizes the importance of
following workplace policies and
procedures in the HIIPP. Supplemental
training ensures employees continue to
have the knowledge and skills they need
to protect themselves from heat hazards.
It provides an opportunity to present
new information that was not available
during the initial training or that
becomes relevant when an employee’s
duties change. Additionally,
supplemental training is necessary
when an employee demonstrates that
they have not retained information from
the initial training (e.g., by failing to
follow appropriate policies and
procedures). Supplemental training
does not necessarily need to include all
information covered in the initial
training, as only some policies or
procedures may need to be reviewed,
and employees will receive a full
refresher training annually.
Proposed paragraph (h)(5) would
require that all training provided under
paragraphs (h)(1) through (4) is
provided in a language and at a literacy
level each employee, supervisor, and
heat safety coordinator understands. In
addition, the provision would require
that the employer provide employees
with an opportunity for questions and
answers about the training materials.
For the training to be effective, the
employer must ensure that it is
provided in a manner that the employee
is able to understand. Employees have
varying educational levels, literacy, and
language skills, and the training must be
presented in a language, or languages,
and at a level of understanding that
accounts for these differences. This may
mean, for example, providing materials,
instruction, or assistance in Spanish
rather than English if the employees
being trained are Spanish-speaking and
do not understand English. The
employer is not required to provide
training in the employee’s preferred
language if the employee understands
both languages; as long as the employee
is able to understand the material in the
language used, the intent of the
proposed standard would be met. As
explained above with respect to
paragraph (h)(1), OSHA does not
mandate testing or specific modes of
ascertaining employee understanding of
the training materials, but expects that
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
all required training will include some
measure of comprehension.
The proposed provision does not
specify the manner in which training
would be delivered. Employers may
conduct training in various ways, such
as in-person (e.g., classroom instruction
or informal discussions during safety
meetings/toolbox talks), virtually (e.g.,
videoconference, recorded video, online
training), using written materials, or any
combination of those methods.
However, this paragraph would require
the employer to provide an opportunity
for employees to ask questions
regardless of the medium of training. It
is critical that trainees have the
opportunity to ask questions and receive
answers if they do not fully understand
the material that is presented to them.
If it is not possible to have someone
present or available during the training,
employers could provide the contact
information of the individual that
employees can contact to answer their
questions (e.g., an email or telephone
contact). OSHA expects employers to
make an effort to respond to questions
promptly.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether the agency should require
other training topics in the standard;
• Whether the inclusion of separate
training requirements for supervisors
and heat safety coordinators is
appropriate, or whether the dutyspecific training requirements in
proposed paragraph (h)(1) are sufficient;
• Whether the agency has identified
appropriate triggers for supplemental
training;
• Whether the agency should require
annual refresher training or whether the
more performance-based supplemental
training requirements are sufficient; and
• Whether the agency should specify
certain criteria that define the start of
heat season.
I. Paragraph (i) Recordkeeping
Paragraph (i) of the proposed standard
would require certain employers to
create written or electronic records of
on-site temperature measurements and
establishes the duration of time that
employers must retain those records.
Specifically, it applies to employers that
have indoor work areas where there is
a reasonable expectation that employees
are or may be exposed to heat at or
above the initial heat trigger, and that
are therefore required to conduct on-site
temperature measurements under
paragraph (d)(3)(ii). These employers
must have and maintain written or
electronic records of these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
measurements. Under paragraph (i),
employers must retain these records for
a minimum of six months.
Maintaining these records, whether
written or electronic, serves several
purposes. It will assist OSHA in
determining conditions at the work site,
which will facilitate OSHA’s ability to
verify employers’ compliance with the
standard’s provisions. Additionally,
these records may facilitate employers
identifying trends in indoor
temperatures and their effect on
employee health and safety. In the event
of a heat-related injury or illness, these
records can help employers assess the
conditions at the time of the injury or
illness in order to prevent such an event
from recurring.
Paragraph (i) applies to indoor work
areas only. This is because employers
cannot accurately rely on weather
forecasting to predict and monitor
temperatures in these areas like they can
for outdoor work areas. It is therefore
not possible for OSHA or the employer
to recreate historic temperature records
for indoor work areas in the absence of
on-site temperature measurement
records. OSHA has preliminarily
determined that six months is an
appropriate timeframe for records
retention because this is the maximum
time permitted for an OSHA
investigation (see 29 U.S.C. 658(c)).
There are several commercially
available heat monitoring devices that
are capable of maintaining electronic
logs of recorded measurements for six
months (ERG, 2024b). Therefore,
employers can comply with the
recordkeeping requirement by using
monitoring devices with sufficient
storage capability. Alternatively,
employers could comply by creating
and maintaining written records based
on monitoring devices that do not have
digital recording capabilities.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
evidence regarding the following:
• Whether six months is an
appropriate and feasible duration of
time to maintain records of monitoring
data;
• Whether permitting employers to
maintain records on devices that store
data locally is appropriate; and
• Whether the standard should
require retention of any other records,
and if so, for what duration.
J. Paragraph (j) Requirements
Implemented at no Cost to Employees
Proposed paragraph (j) provides that
implementation of all requirements of
the standard must be at no cost to
employees, including paying employees
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70799
their normal rate of pay when
compliance requires employee time.
This provision is included to make it
clear that the employer is responsible
for all costs associated with
implementing the standard, including
not only direct monetary expenses to
the employee, but also reasonable time
to perform required tasks and training.
This proposed requirement is
consistent with the OSH Act, which
requires employers to ensure a safe and
healthful workplace. The OSH Act
reflects Congress’s determination that
the costs of compliance with the Act
and OSHA standards are part of the cost
of doing business and OSHA may
foreclose employers from shifting those
costs to employees (see Am. Textile
Mfrs. Inst., Inc. v. Donovan, 452 U.S.
490, 514 (1981); Phelps Dodge Corp. v.
OSHRC, 725 F.2d 1237, 1239–40 (9th
Cir. 1984); see also Sec’y of Labor v.
Beverly Healthcare-Hillview, 541 F.3d
193, 198–201 (3d Cir. 2008)). The
proposed requirement is also consistent
with OSHA’s longstanding practice in
prior rulemakings. See, e.g., Employer
Payment for Personal Protective
Equipment; 72 FR 64342, 64344 (Nov.
15, 2007); Occupational Exposure to
Bloodborne Pathogens, 56 FR 64004,
64125 (Dec. 1991). The intent of
proposed paragraph (j) is that the
standard be implemented at no cost to
employees because employer payment
for items, such as access to water and
shade, is necessary to ensure employees
are provided safe working conditions
and are protected from the hazard of
heat stress. Employees are more likely to
take advantage of various workplace
protections if such protections are
provided at no cost to them. Moreover,
as explained in Section VIII.,
Distributional Analysis, workers from
underserved populations are
disproportionately exposed to
occupational heat hazards. For all
workers, but particularly more
vulnerable workers, protection from
occupational hazards must not depend
on workers’ ability to pay for those
protections. In indicating that the
implementation of all requirements of
this standard must be at no cost to the
employee, OSHA considers costs to
include not only direct monetary
expenses to the employee, but also the
time and other expenses necessary to
perform required tasks.
The following discussion highlights
specific proposed requirements in
paragraphs (c) Heat injury and illness
prevention plan, (d) Identifying heat
hazards, (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, (f) Requirements
at or above the high heat trigger, (g)
Heat illness and emergency response
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70800
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and planning, and (h) Training. This
discussion is illustrative of the
requirement that employees are not to
bear the costs of implementing the
standard. However, the requirement in
proposed paragraph (j) applies to all
provisions of the proposed standard,
including employee time spent to
implement or comply with those
provisions.
Proposed paragraphs (c)(6) and (7)
would require employers to seek the
input and involvement of nonmanagerial employees and their
representatives, if any, in the
development and implementation of the
heat injury and illness prevention plan
(HIIPP) and during any reviews or
updates of the HIIPP. Similarly,
proposed paragraph (d)(3)(iv) would
require the employer to seek the input
and involvement of non-managerial
employees and their representatives, if
any, when evaluating the work site to
identify work areas with a reasonable
expectation of exposures at or above the
initial heat trigger and in developing
and updating monitoring plans. Under
these paragraphs, the employer would
be required to cover the expenses of
non-managerial employees such as any
travel costs that may be necessary, and
to pay employees their normal rate of
pay for the time necessary to engage in
the development, implementation, and
the required reviews and updates of the
employer’s HIIPP and monitoring plan.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2) would
require the employer to provide access
to potable water for drinking that is
placed in locations readily accessible to
the employee, suitably cool, and of
sufficient quantity to provide access to
1 quart of drinking water per employee
per hour. To ensure this is provided at
no cost to employees, the employer
would not only need to pay for the
water, its container, and the means to
utilize the water (cups, bottles, etc.) but
would be required to pay employees
their normal rate of pay for time
necessary to consume water and any
time that may be necessary to travel to
and from the location where water is
provided. For example, if an employee
works in an area where water cannot be
made available due to safety
considerations (e.g., certain areas in
foundries) or because of the presence of
toxic materials, and must walk to a
water fountain in a break room to obtain
water, the employer would be required
to pay the employee for the time
required to walk to the water fountain,
consume water, and return to the work
area.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7) would
require employers to implement an
acclimatization protocol for new and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
returning employees when they would
be exposed to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger except when the employer
can demonstrate the employee
consistently worked under the same or
similar conditions as the employer’s
working conditions within the prior 14
days. An acclimatization protocol sets
forth the process whereby employees
gradually adapt to work in the heat.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i) specifies
the acclimatization protocol for new
employees exposed to heat at or above
the initial heat trigger during their first
week on the job. The employer would
have a choice to either: (A) implement
an acclimatization plan that, at
minimum, would include the measures
in proposed paragraph (f) (i.e., rest
breaks, observation for signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness, a
hazard alert, and warning signs at
excessively high heat areas); or (B)
provide for gradual acclimatization to
heat in which employee exposure to
heat is restricted to no more than 20%
of a normal work shift exposure
duration on the first day of work, 40%
on the second day of work, 60% of the
third day of work, and 80% on the
fourth day of work. Proposed paragraph
(e)(7)(ii) specifies the acclimatization
protocol for returning employees (i.e.,
employees who have been away (e.g., on
vacation or sick leave) for more than 14
days) exposed to heat at or above the
initial heat trigger during their first
week back on the job. The employer
would have a choice to either: (A)
implement an acclimatization plan that,
at minimum, would incorporate the
measures in proposed paragraph (f)
whenever the heat index is at or above
the initial heat trigger during the
employee’s first week upon returning to
work; or (B) provide for gradual
acclimatization to heat in which
employee exposure to heat is restricted
to no more than 50% of a normal work
shift exposure during the first day of
work, 60% on the second day of work,
and 80% on the third day of work.
An employer who chooses to provide
a plan for gradual acclimatization to
heat in which employee exposure to
heat is restricted would be required to
compensate the employee for the hours
they would typically be expected to
work, i.e., the employee’s normal full
shift, after acclimatization. For example,
if a new employee would be expected to
work 8 hours on a normal shift after
acclimatization and the new employee
would be restricted to 50% exposure
during the normal work shift or 4 hours
on the first day, the employer would be
required to compensate the employee at
their normal rate of pay for the full 8
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
hours even if the employee worked for
only 4 hours.
OSHA anticipates that many
employers would provide employees
with other work (e.g., work activities
performed in indoor work areas or
vehicles where air-conditioning
consistently keeps the ambient
temperature below 80 °F, sedentary
work activities at indoor work sites)
during the acclimatization period when
they are restricted from duties that
involve exposure to heat at or above the
initial heat trigger. Employees would
still be able to work a full 8-hour shift
as long as their duration of exposure to
heat at or above the initial heat trigger
is limited to the specified duration.
Proposed paragraphs (e)(8) and (f)(2)
would require that employees be paid
during the rest breaks required by those
provisions. OSHA finds it important
that employees be paid during the
breaks to which they are entitled under
the standard so that employees are not
financially penalized and thus
discouraged from taking advantage of
those protections. For employees
compensated on an hourly basis, this
means employees would need to receive
the same hourly rate of pay during rest
breaks required by paragraphs (e)(8) and
(f)(2) as they would receive while
working.
Some employees are paid on a piecerate basis, meaning they are
compensated based on factors such as
jobs completed, quantity of produce
picked, or products produced. Examples
of employees compensated on a piecerate basis include agricultural
employees paid by the pound of
produce picked, mechanics paid for
each type of job completed (e.g., oil
change or tune-up), warehouse
employees paid by the number and size
of orders filled, manufacturing
employees paid by the number of
products manufactured, or construction
employees paid by the size and type of
job completed. Employees paid on a
piece-rate basis may be especially
reluctant to take breaks. In a study by
Wadsworth et al., 2019, focus group
discussions with piece-rate farm
employees revealed that many
expressed concerns about possible
losses in earnings and that they might
be replaced by another employee if they
took breaks, and many such employees
brought their own water to work to
reduce the time they are not picking
produce.
To ensure piece rate employees are
not discouraged from taking rest breaks,
the proposed standard would require
employers to compensate them at their
normal rate of pay for time necessary for
rest breaks. In the context of piece rate
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
employees and for purposes of this
proposed standard, OSHA intends the
phrase ‘‘normal rate of pay’’ to mean the
rate that results from the following
approach, which has also been adopted
by the State of California (Cal. Lab. Code
section 226.2 (eff. Jan 1, 2021)):
employers would determine the normal
rate of pay for piece-rate employees by
dividing the total weekly pay by the
total hours worked during the work
week, not including heat-related rest
breaks. That value would be multiplied
by the total time of heat-related rest
breaks to determine how much
employees need to be paid for those
breaks. For example, if a piece-rate
employee works a 5-day work week, 8
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. with a 30-minute
unpaid lunch break from 12–12:30 each
day, and earns $600 in piece rate pay for
the week, and under proposed
paragraph (f)(2) the employer would be
obligated to provide two 15-minute
heat-related rest breaks per day (i.e., the
employee is exposed at or above the
high heat trigger from 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. each day), that employee would
receive a normal rate of pay of $16/hour
for heat-related rest breaks based on the
following formula:
Formula for Heat-Related Rest Break
Compensation of Piece-rate
Employees
Total heat-related rest break time/
week = 0.5 hours/day × 5 days/
week = 2.5 hours/week
Hours worked, excluding non-meal
heat-related breaks = 40 hours¥2.5
hours = 37.5 hours
Heat-related rest break compensation
per hour = $600 ÷ 37.5 hours = $16/
hour
For an employee who also took rest
breaks needed to prevent overheating
under proposed paragraph (e)(8), the
time of those rest break(s) would be
added to the total heat-related rest break
time per week to calculate the
employee’s normal rate of pay. OSHA
has preliminarily determined that this
approach accurately represents the
normal rate of pay for piece-rate workers
and thereby ensures that these workers
would not lose pay when taking
advantage of the standard’s protection.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(i) would
require that an employee experiencing
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness must be relieved from duty. The
proposed standard would require the
employer to pay employees their normal
pay while they are relieved from duty
until the signs and symptoms subside.
Proposed paragraph (h) would
establish requirements for training on
heat hazards and associated protective
measures. All training provided by the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
employer to meet the requirements of
the standard would be required to be
provided at no cost to the employee.
The employer would be required to pay
employees for time spent in training,
including any time needed to travel to
and from training.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and
information on the following:
• Whether OSHA should consider an
alternative approach to calculating
normal rate of pay for piece-rate
employees, and what those alternative
approaches are;
• Whether OSHA should make the
calculation for piece rate workers’
normal rate of pay explicit in paragraph
(j); and
• Whether proposed paragraph (j)
mandating that requirements be
implemented at no cost to employees is
adequate, or whether there are other
potential costs to employees that OSHA
should take into consideration.
K. Paragraph (k) Dates
Paragraph (k) of the proposed
standard would establish the effective
date for the final standard and the date
for compliance with the requirements
specified in the standard. In paragraph
(k)(1), OSHA proposes an effective date
60 days after the date of publication of
the final standard in the Federal
Register. This period is intended to
allow affected employers the
opportunity to familiarize themselves
with the standard.
Paragraph (k)(2) of the proposed
standard would require employers to
comply with all requirements of the
standard 90 days after the effective date
(150 days after the date of publication
of the final standard in the Federal
Register). The proposed compliance
date is intended to allow adequate time
for employers to undertake the
necessary planning and preparation
steps to comply with the standard.
OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
90 days is sufficient time for employers
to develop a heat injury and illness
prevention plan (HIIPP), identify heat
hazards in their workplace(s),
implement the protective measures
required under the standard, and
provide required training to employees.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA solicits comment on the
adequacy of the proposed effective and
compliance dates. OSHA aims to ensure
that protective measures are
implemented as quickly as possible,
while also ensuring that employers have
sufficient time to implement these
measures. In addition, the agency is
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70801
interested in whether there are any
circumstances that would warrant an
alternative timeframe for compliance,
including a shorter timeframe, and seeks
comment on approaches that would
phase in requirements of the standard.
L. Paragraph (l) Severability
The severability provision, paragraph
(l) of the proposed standard, serves two
purposes. First, it expresses OSHA’s
intent that the general presumption of
severability should be applied to this
standard; i.e., if any section or provision
of the proposed standard is held invalid
or unenforceable or is stayed or
enjoined by any court of competent
jurisdiction, the remaining sections or
provisions should remain effective and
operative. Second, the severability
provision also serves to express OSHA’s
judgment, based on its technical
expertise, that each individual section
and provision of the proposed standard
remains workable in the event that one
or more sections or provisions are
invalidated, stayed, or enjoined; thus,
the severance of any provisions,
sections, or applications of the standard
will not render the standard ineffective
or unlawful as a whole. Consequently,
the remainder of the standard should be
allowed to take effect.
With respect to this rulemaking, it is
OSHA’s intent that all provisions and
sections be considered severable. In this
regard, the agency intends that: (1) in
the event that any provision within a
section of the standard is stayed,
enjoined, or invalidated, all remaining
provisions within remain workable and
shall remain effective and operative; (2)
in the event that any whole section of
the standard is stayed, enjoined, or
invalidated, all remaining sections
remain workable and shall remain
effective and operative; and (3) in the
event that any application of a provision
is stayed, enjoined, or invalidated, the
provision shall be construed so as to
continue to give the maximum effect to
the provision permitted by law.
Although OSHA always intends for a
presumption of severability to be
applied to its standards, the agency has
opted to include an explicit severability
clause in this standard to remove any
potential for doubt as to its intent.
OSHA believes that this clarity is useful
because of the multilayered
programmatic approach to risk
reduction it proposes here. The agency
has preliminarily determined that the
suite of programmatic requirements
described in Section VII., Explanation of
Proposed Requirements, is reasonably
necessary and appropriate to protect
employees from the significant risks
posed by exposure to heat in the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70802
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
workplace. While OSHA preliminarily
finds that these requirements
substantially reduce the risk of
occupational injury and illness from
exposure to heat when implemented
together, the agency also believes that
each individual requirement will
independently reduce this risk to some
extent, and that each requirement added
to the first will result in a progressively
greater reduction of risk. For example,
should a reviewing court find the
requirement of paragraph (f)(2),
requiring 15 minute rest breaks every
two hours in high heat conditions
invalid for some reason, the remainder
of controls required by the standard in
those conditions would still provide
necessary protections to employees, and
OSHA would intend that the rest of the
standard should stand. Therefore,
OSHA intends to have as many of the
protective measures in this standard
implemented as possible to reduce
employees’ risk of occupational injury,
illness, and death from exposure to heat.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction
determine that any provision or section
of this standard is invalid on its face or
as applied, the court should presume
that OSHA would have issued the
remainder of the standard without the
invalidated provision(s) or
application(s). Similarly, should a court
of competent jurisdiction determine that
any provision, section, or application of
this standard is required to be stayed or
enjoined, the court should presume that
OSHA intends for the remainder of the
standard to take effect. See, e.g., Am.
Dental Ass’n v. Martin, 984 F.2d 823,
830–31 (7th Cir. 1993) (affirming and
allowing most of OSHA’s bloodborne
pathogens standard to take effect while
vacating application of the standard to
certain employers).
VIII. Preliminary Economic Analysis
and Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
OSHA has examined the impacts of
this rulemaking as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory
Planning and Review (September
30,1993), Executive Order 13563 on
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review (January 18, 2011), Executive
Order 14094 entitled ‘‘Modernizing
Regulatory Review’’ (April 6, 2023), the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96354),
section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (March 22, 1995;
Pub. L. 104–4), and Executive Order
13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity).5 The Executive Order 14094
entitled ‘‘Modernizing Regulatory
Review’’ (hereinafter, the Modernizing
E.O.) amends section 3(f)(1) of Executive
Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review). The amended section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866 defines a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an
action that is likely to result in a rule:
(1) having an annual effect on the
economy of $200 million or more in any
1 year (adjusted every 3 years by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) for changes in gross domestic
product), or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, territorial, or
Tribal governments or communities; (2)
creating a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfering with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise legal or policy issues for which
centralized review would meaningfully
further the President’s priorities or the
principles set forth in this Executive
Order, as specifically authorized in a
timely manner by the Administrator of
OIRA in each case.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
must be prepared for regulatory actions
that are significant per section 3(f)(1)
($200 million or more in any 1 year).
OMB’s OIRA has determined this
rulemaking is significant per section
3(f)(1) as measured by the $200 million
or more in any 1 year. Accordingly,
OSHA has prepared this Preliminary
Economic Analysis (PEA) 6 that to the
best of the agency’s ability presents the
costs and benefits of the rulemaking.
OIRA has reviewed this proposed
standard, and the agency has provided
the following assessment of its impact.
5 While OSHA presents the following analysis
under the requirements of Executive Orders 12866
and 13563, the agency ultimately cannot simply
maximize net benefits due to the overriding legal
requirements in the OSH Act.
6 OSHA historically has referred to their
regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) as Economic
Analyses in part because performing an analysis of
economic feasibility is a core legal function of their
purpose. But a PEA (or Final Economic Analysis)
should be understood as including an RIA.
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
A. Market Failure and Need for
Regulation
I. Introduction
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735
(September 30, 1993)) and Executive
Order 13563 (76 FR 3821 (January 18,
2011)) direct regulatory agencies to
assess whether, from a legal or an
economic view, a Federal regulation is
needed to the extent it is not ‘‘required
by law.’’ Executive Order 12866 states:
‘‘Federal agencies should promulgate
only such regulations as are required by
law, are necessary to interpret the law,
or are made necessary by compelling
public need, such as material failures of
private markets to protect or improve
the health and safety of the public, the
environment, or the well-being of the
American people.’’ This Executive
Order further requires that each agency
‘‘identify the problem that it intends to
address (including, where applicable,
the failures of private markets or public
institutions that warrant new agency
action)’’ and instructs agencies to
‘‘identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation.’’ (58 FR
51735 (September 30, 1993)). This
section addresses those issues of market
failure and alternatives to regulation as
directed by the Executive Order.
OSHA is proposing a new standard
for Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings (29
CFR 1910.148) because the agency has
preliminarily determined, based on the
evidence in the record, that there is a
compelling public need for a
comprehensive standard addressing
employees’ occupational exposure to
hazardous heat. OSHA presents the
legal requirements governing this
standard and its preliminary findings
and conclusions supporting the
proposed standard in Section II.,
Pertinent Legal Authority, and
throughout other sections of the
preamble.
As detailed in Section VIII.B., Profile
of Affected Industries, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that millions
of employees are exposed to
occupational heat hazards that place
them at a significant risk of serious
injury, illness, and death. Employees
exposed to heat suffer higher rates of
non-fatal heat-related injuries and
illnesses (HRIs) and heat-related
fatalities, including heat stroke, heat
exhaustion, heat syncope,
rhabdomyolysis, heat cramps,
hyponatremia, heat edema, and heat
rash; and heat-related injuries,
including falls, collisions, and other
workplace accidents (see Section IV.,
Health Effects for additional
information). OSHA estimates that the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
proposed standard would prevent 531
heat-related fatalities (of the estimated
559 annual fatalities) and 16,027 HRIs
per year (of the estimated 24,656 annual
HRIs).
These estimates have potential
limitations. The parameters used to
estimate the magnitude of
underreporting of HRIs and the
effectiveness of the proposed standard
have considerable uncertainty.
Furthermore, these estimates do not
account for other expected benefits from
the rule (e.g., reduction in indirect
traumatic injuries due to heat and
reduction in worker disutility). For
additional discussion see Sections
VIII.E.IV., Additional Unquantified
Potential Benefits and VIII.E.V.,
Uncertainty in Benefits.
OSHA has also preliminarily
determined that the standard is
technologically and economically
feasible (see Section IX., Technological
Feasibility and Section VIII.D.,
Economic Feasibility). The agency not
only finds that this proposed standard is
necessary and appropriate to ensure the
safety and health of employees exposed
to heat, as required by the OSH Act, but
also demonstrates, in this section, that
this standard corrects a market failure in
which labor markets fail to adequately
protect employee health and safety.
Even a perfectly functioning market
maximizes efficient allocation of goods
and services at the expense of other
important social values to which the
market (as reflected in the collective
actions of its participants) is indifferent
or undervalues. In such cases,
government intervention might be
justified to address a compelling public
need. The history and enactment of the
OSH Act indicate a Congressional view
that American markets undervalued
occupational safety and health when it
set forth the Act’s protective purposes
and authorized the Secretary of Labor to
promulgate occupational safety and
health standards.
As discussed in this section, OSHA
concludes there is a demonstrable
failure of labor markets to protect
employees from exposure to significant,
unnecessary risks from heat exposure.
The agency recognizes that many firms
and governments have responded to the
risks from heat exposure by
implementing control programs for their
employees. Information that OSHA has
collected suggests that many employees
with occupational exposure to
hazardous heat currently receive some
level of protection against heat hazards
and some existing control programs may
be as protective as the proposed
standard. Nevertheless, the effectiveness
of labor markets in providing the level
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
of employee health and safety required
by the OSH Act is not universal, as
many other employers in the same
sectors fail to provide their employees
with adequate protection against heat
hazards. This is evidenced by the
documented injuries, illnesses, and
deaths discussed throughout this
preamble. Accordingly, the existence of
adequate protections in some
workplaces speaks to the feasibility of
the standard, not necessarily to the lack
of need.
In this case, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that protections are needed
to ensure the safety and health of
employees exposed to heat. This section
is devoted to showing that markets fail
with respect to optimal risk for
occupational exposure to heat hazards.
Other sections of this preamble address
whether, given that markets fail, a new
regulation is needed.
The discussion below considers why
labor markets, as well as information
dissemination programs, workers’
compensation systems, and tort liability
options, each may fail to protect
employees from heat hazards, resulting
in the need for a more protective OSHA
standard.
II. Labor Market Imperfections
Under suitable conditions, a market
system is economically efficient in the
following sense: resources are allocated
where they are most highly valued; the
appropriate mix of goods and services,
embodying the desired bundle of
characteristics, is produced; and further
improvements in the welfare of any
member of society cannot be attained
without making at least one other
member worse off.
Economic theory, supported by
empirical data, posits that, in the labor
market, employers and their potential
employees bargain over the conditions
of employment, including not only
salary and other employee benefits, but
also occupational risks to employee
safety and health. Employers compete
among themselves to attract employees.
In order to induce potential employees
to accept hazardous jobs, employers
must offer a higher salary—termed a
‘‘wage premium for risk’’ or ‘‘risk
premium’’ for short—to compensate for
the additional job risk.7 Because
employers must pay higher wages for
7 The concept of compensating wage differentials
for undesirable job characteristics, including
occupational hazards, goes back to Adam Smith’s
The Wealth of Nations, which was originally
published in 1776. More recent empirical
investigation has tended to validate the core theory,
with the acknowledgement of labor market
imperfections, as otherwise noted in this section
(e.g., Lavetti, 2023).
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70803
more hazardous work, they have an
incentive to make the workplace safer
by making safety-related investments in
equipment and training or by using
more costly but safer work practices.
According to economic theory, the
operation of the labor market will
provide the optimal level of
occupational risk when each employer’s
additional cost for job safety just equals
the avoided payout in risk premiums to
employees (Lavetti, 2023). The theory
assumes that each employer is
indifferent to whether it pays the higher
wage or pays for a safer or more
healthful workplace but will opt for
whichever costs less or improves
productivity more.
For the labor market to function in a
way that leads to optimal levels of
occupational risk, three conditions must
be satisfied. First, potential employees
and employers must have the same,
perfect information—that is, they must
be fully informed about their workplace
options, including job hazards, or be
able to acquire such information.
Second, participants in the labor market
must directly bear all the costs and
obtain all the benefits of their actions.
In other words, none of the direct
impacts of labor market transactions can
be externalized to outside parties. Third,
the relevant labor markets must be
perfectly competitive, which requires a
large number of employers, a large
number of employees, and other
conditions such that no individual
economic agent is able to influence the
risk-adjusted wage, and such that the
risk-adjusted wage, net of other
amenities, is equal to the marginal
revenue associated with their output
(Card, 2022).
The discussion below examines (1)
imperfect information, (2) externalities,
and (3) imperfect competition in the
labor market in more detail, with
particular emphasis on employee
exposure to heat hazards, as
appropriate.8
A. Imperfect Information
As described below, imperfect
information about job hazards is present
at several levels that reinforce each
other: employers frequently lack
knowledge about workplace hazards
and how to reduce them; employees are
often unaware of the workplace risks to
which they are exposed; and employees
typically have difficulty in
understanding the risk information they
are able to obtain. Imperfect information
at these various levels has likely
8 The section on workers’ compensation
insurance later in this section identifies and
discusses other related market imperfections.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70804
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
impeded the efficient operation of the
labor market regarding workplace risk
because employees—unaware of job
hazards—do not seek, or receive, full
compensation for the risks they bear. As
a result, even if employers have full
knowledge about the risk, their
employees do not. If employees do not
have full knowledge about the risk,
employers have less incentive to invest
in safer working conditions than they
would in the presence of full
information since wages are suppressed
below what full knowledge by the
employees would yield.
I. Lack of Employer Information
In the absence of regulation,
employers may lack economic
incentives to optimally identify the
safety and health risks that their
employees face.9 Furthermore,
employers have an economic incentive
to withhold the information they do
possess about job hazards from their
employees, whose response would be to
demand safe working conditions or
higher wages to compensate for the risk.
Relatedly, in the absence of regulation,
employers, as well as third parties, may
have fewer incentives to develop new
technological solutions to protect
employees on the job.10
This suggests that, without regulation,
and the incentives that come with it,
many employers are unlikely to make
themselves aware of the magnitude of
heat-related safety and health risks in
the workplace or of the availability of
effective ways of ameliorating or
eliminating these risks. OSHA believes
that requiring employers to monitor heat
conditions will help to alleviate
situations in which employers and/or
employees may not realize situations
when heat becomes hazardous.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
II. Lack of Employee Information About
Health Hazards
Markets cannot adequately address
the risks of occupational heat exposure
if employees and employers are
unaware of the changes in risk brought
about by an employer’s actions or
inaction. Even if employees and
employers are aware of a risk, the
employer may have limited economic
motivation to install controls unless the
employees are able to accurately assess
9 Other private parties may lack sufficient
incentives to invest resources to collect and analyze
occupational risk data due to the public-good
nature of the information. See Ashford and Caldart
(1996).
10 For evidence of regulatory stimuli inducing
innovations to improve employee health and safety,
see, for example, Ashford et al. (1985), as well as
more recent evidence from OSHA’s regulatory
reviews under section 610 of the RFA (5 U.S.C.
610).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the effects of those controls on their
occupational risks.
Accordingly, even if employees have
a general understanding that they are at
increased risk of injury or illness from
occupational exposure to heat, it is
unrealistic to expect, absent mandatory
regulatory requirements, that they know
the precise risks associated with
different exposure levels or the
exposures they are experiencing, much
less that they can use that knowledge to
negotiate a significant reduction in
exposures and other protections or (if
more desirable) trade it for greater
hazard pay.
Both experimental studies and
observed market behavior suggest that
individuals have considerable difficulty
rationally processing information about
low-probability, high-consequence
events such as occupational fatalities
and long-term disabilities.11 For
example, many individuals may not be
able to comprehend or rationally act on
risk information when it is presented, as
risk analysis often is, in mathematical
terms—a 1/1,000 versus a 1/10,000
versus a 1/100,000 annual risk of death
from occupational causes.
Of course, in the abstract, many of the
problems that employers and employees
face in obtaining and processing
occupational risk can lead employees to
overestimate as well as underestimate
the risk. However, some of the impacts
of heat exposure may be sufficiently
infrequent, unfamiliar, or unobvious
that many employees (and at least some
employers) may be completely unaware
of the risk, and therefore will
underestimate it.
In addition, for markets to optimally
address this risk, employees need to be
aware of the changes in risk brought
about by an employer’s actions. Even if
employees are aware of a risk, the
employer may have limited economic
motivation to install controls or
implement protective measures unless
the employees are able to accurately
assess the effects of those controls or
measures on their occupational risks.
Furthermore, there is substantial
evidence that most individuals are
unrealistically optimistic, even in highstakes, high-risk situations and even if
they are aware of the statistical risks
(Thaler and Sunstein, 2009). Although
the agency lacks specific evidence on
the effect of these attitudes on assessing
occupational safety and health risks,
this suggests that some employees
underestimate their own risk of work11 The literature documenting risk perception
problems is extensive. See the classic work of
Tversky and Kahneman (1974). For a recent
summary of risk perception problems and their
causes (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
related injury or illness and, therefore,
even in situations where they have the
bargaining power to do so, may not
bargain for or receive adequate
compensation for bearing those risks.
Finally, the difficulty that employees
have in distinguishing marginal
differences in risk at alternative
worksites, both within an industry and
across industries, creates a disincentive
for employers to incur the costs of
reducing workplace risk.
B. Externalities
Externalities arise when an economic
transaction generates direct positive or
negative spillover effects on third
parties not involved in the transaction.
The resulting spillover effect, which
leads to a divergence between private
and social costs, undermines the
efficient allocation of resources in the
market because the market is imparting
inaccurate cost and price signals to the
transacting parties. Applied to the labor
market, when costs are externalized,
they are not reflected in the decisions
that employers and their potential
employees make—leading to allocative
distortions in that market.
Negative externalities exist in the
labor market because many of the costs
of occupational injury and illness are
borne by parties other than individual
employers or employees. The major
source of these negative externalities is
the occupational injury or illness cost
that workers’ compensation does not
cover.12 Employees and their employers
often bear only a portion of these costs.
Outside of workers’ compensation,
employees incapacitated by an
occupational injury or illness and their
families often receive health care,
rehabilitation, retraining, direct income
maintenance, or life insurance benefits,
much of which are paid for by society
through Social Security and other social
insurance and social welfare
programs.13
Furthermore, substantial portions of
the medical care system in the United
States are heavily subsidized by the
12 Workers’ compensation is discussed separately
later in this section. As described there, in many
cases (particularly for smaller firms), the premiums
that an individual employer pays for workers’
compensation are only loosely related, or unrelated,
to the occupational risks that that employer’s
employees bear. In addition, workers’ compensation
does not cover chronic occupational diseases in
most instances. For that reason, negative
externalities tend to be a more significant issue in
the case of occupational exposures that result in
diseases.
13 In addition, many occupational injuries and
most occupational illnesses are not processed
through the workers’ compensation system at all. In
these instances, employees receive care from their
own private physician rather than from their
employer’s physician.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
government so that part of the medical
cost of treating injured or ill employees
is paid for by the rest of society (Nichols
and Zeckhauser, 1977). To the extent
that employers and employees do not
bear the full costs of occupational injury
and illness, they will ignore these
externalized costs in their labor market
negotiations. The result may be an
inefficiently high level of occupational
risk.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Imperfect Competition
In the idealized labor market, the
actions of large numbers of buyers and
sellers of labor services establish the
market-clearing, risk-compensated
wage, so that individual employers and
employees effectively take that wage as
given. However, the labor market is not
one market, but many markets
differentiated by location, occupation,
and other factors; entrants in the labor
market face search frictions because of
limited information on employment
options; and, furthermore, in wage
negotiations with their own employees,
employers are typically in an
advantageous position relative to all
other potential employers (e.g., Card,
2022). In these situations, discussed
below, employers may have sufficient
power to influence or to determine the
wage their employees receive. This may
undermine the conditions necessary for
perfect competition and can result in
inadequate compensation for employees
exposed to workplace hazards.
Significant unemployment levels, local
or national, may also undermine the
conditions necessary for adequate
compensation for exposure to workplace
hazards (Hirsch et al., 2018).
Beyond the classic—but relatively
rare—example of a town dominated by
a single company, there is significant
evidence that some employers
throughout the economy are not wagetakers but, rather, face upward-sloping
labor supply curves and enjoy some
market power in setting wages and other
conditions of employment.14 An
important source of this phenomenon is
the cost of a job search and the
employer’s relative advantage, from size
and economies of scale, in acquiring
labor market information.15 Another
potentially noteworthy problem in the
14 See Borjas (2000), Ashenfelter et al. (2010), and
Boal and Ransom (1997). The term ‘‘monopsony’’
power or ‘‘oligopsony’’ power are sometimes
applied to this situation.
15 See Borjas (2000). As supplemental authorities,
Weil (2014) presents theory and evidence both in
support of this proposition and to show that, in
many situations, larger firms have more market
power than smaller firms, while Boal and Ransom
(1997) note that the persistent wage dispersion
observed in labor markets is a central feature of
equilibrium search models.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
labor market is that, contrary to the
model of perfect competition,
employees with jobs cannot without
cost quit and obtain a similar job at the
same wage with another employer.
Employees leaving their current job may
be confronted with the expense and
time requirements of a job search, the
expense associated with relocating to
take advantage of better employment
opportunities, the loss of firm-specific
human capital (i.e., firm-specific skills
and knowledge that the employee
possesses16), the cost and difficulty of
upgrading job skills, and the risk of a
prolonged period of unemployment.
Finally, employers derive market power
from the fact that a portion of the
compensation their employees receive is
not transferable to other jobs. Examples
include job-specific training and
associated compensation, seniority
rights and associated benefits, and
investments in a pension plan.
Under the conditions described
above, employers would not have to
take the market-clearing wage as given
but could offer a lower wage than would
be observed in a perfectly competitive
market,17 including less than full
compensation for workplace health and
safety risks. As a result, relative to the
idealized competitive labor market,
employers would have less incentive to
invest in workplace safety. In any event,
for reasons already discussed, an
idealized wage premium is not an
adequate substitute for a workplace that
puts a premium on health and safety.
III. Non-Market and Quasi-Market
Alternatives
The following discussion considers
whether non-market and quasi-market
alternatives to the proposed standard
would be capable of protecting
employees from heat hazards. The
alternatives under consideration are
information dissemination programs,
workers’ compensation systems, and
tort liability options.
A. Information Dissemination Programs
One alternative to OSHA’s proposed
standard could be the dissemination of
information, either voluntarily or
through compliance with a targeted
mandatory information rule, akin to
OSHA’s Hazard Communication
standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), which
would provide more information about
the safety and health risks associated
with exposure to environmental heat.
16 MacLeod and Nakavachara (2007) note the
correlation between firm-specific skills and
relatively high income.
17 For a graphical demonstration that an employer
with monopsony power will pay less than the
competitive market wage, see Borjas (2000).
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70805
Better informed potential employees
could more accurately assess the
occupational risks associated with
different jobs, thereby facilitating,
through labor market transactions,
higher risk premiums for more
hazardous work and inducing
employers to make the workplace less
hazardous. The proposed standard
recognizes the link between the
dissemination of information and
workplace risks by requiring that
employees exposed to heat be provided
with information and training about the
risks they encounter and ways to
mitigate those risks. There are several
reasons, however, why reliance on
information dissemination programs
alone would not yield the level of
employee protection achievable through
the proposed standard, which
incorporates hazard communication as
part of a comprehensive approach
designed to control the hazard in
addition to providing for the disclosure
of information about it.
First, in the case of voluntary
information dissemination programs,
absent a regulation, there may be
significant economic incentives, for all
the reasons discussed in section
VIII.A.II. above, for the employer not to
gather relevant exposure data or
distribute occupational risk information
so that the employees would not change
jobs or demand higher wages to
compensate for their newly identified
occupational risks.
Second, even if employees were better
informed about workplace risks and
hazards, all of the defects in the
functioning of the private labor market
previously discussed—the limited
ability of employees to evaluate risk
information, externalities, and imperfect
competition—would still apply.
Because of the existence of these
defects, better information alone would
not lead to wage premiums for risk that
would incentivize employers to make
workplaces safer, in accordance with
compensating differentials theory
(Lavetti, 2023). Regardless, as
mentioned above in section VIII.A.I.,
even the level of employee safety and
health attained by the wage premium
under efficient markets may be lower
than the level justified by other
important social values that efficient
markets may undervalue. Finally, as
discussed in Section VIII.E., Benefits, a
number of additional safety provisions
under the proposed standard would
complement information and training
provided by other regulatory vehicles.
Thus, while improved access to
information about heat-related hazards
can provide for more rational decisionmaking in the private labor market,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70806
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
OSHA concludes that information
dissemination programs would not, by
themselves, produce an adequate level
of employee protection.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Workers’ Compensation Systems
Another theoretical alternative to
OSHA regulation could be to determine
that no standard is needed because State
workers’ compensation programs
augment the workings of the labor
market to limit occupational risks to
employee safety and health. After all,
one of the objectives of the workers’
compensation system is to shift the
costs of occupational injury and illness
from employees to employers in order to
induce employers to improve working
conditions. Two other objectives
relevant to this discussion are to
provide fair and prompt compensation
to employees for medical costs and lost
wages resulting from workplace injury
and illness and, through the riskspreading features of the workers’
compensation insurance pool, to
prevent individual employers from
suffering a catastrophic financial loss
(Ashford, 2007).
OSHA identifies two primary reasons,
discussed below, why the workers’
compensation system has fallen short of
the goal of shifting to employers the
costs of workplace injury and illness—
including, in particular, the costs of
employee exposure to heat-related
hazards. As a result, OSHA concludes
that workers’ compensation programs
alone do not adequately protect
employees.
I. Limitations on Payouts
The first reason that employers do not
fully pay the costs of work-related
injuries and illnesses under the workers’
compensation system is that, even for
those claims that are accepted into the
system, States have imposed significant
limitations on payouts. Depending on
the State, these limitations and
restrictions include:
• Caps on wage replacement based on
the average wage in the State rather than
the injured employee’s actual wage;
• Restrictions on which medical care
services are compensated and the
amount of that compensation;
• No compensation for non-pecuniary
losses, such as pain and suffering or
impairment not directly related to
earning power;
• Either no, or limited, cost-of-living
increases;
• Restrictions on permanent, partial,
and total disability benefits, either by
specifying a maximum number of weeks
for which benefits can be paid or by
imposing an absolute ceiling on dollar
payouts; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
• A low absolute ceiling on death
benefits.
II. A Divergence Between Workers’
Compensation Premiums and
Workplace Risk
The second reason workers’
compensation does not adequately shift
the costs of work-related injuries and
illnesses to employers is that the riskspreading objective of workers’
compensation conflicts with, and
ultimately helps to undermine, the costinternalization objective.18 For the 99
percent of employers who rely on
workers’ compensation insurance,19 the
payment of premiums represents their
primary cost for occupational injuries
and illnesses, such as heat-related
injuries and illnesses. However, the
mechanism for determining an
employer’s workers’ compensation
insurance premium typically fails to
reflect the actual occupational risk
present in that employer’s workplace.
Approximately 85 percent of
employers have their premiums set
based on a ‘‘class rating,’’ which is
based on industry illness and injury
history. Employers in this class are
typically the smallest firms and
represent only about 15 percent of
employees (Ashford, 2007). Small firms
are often ineligible for experience rating
because of insufficient claims history or
because of a high year-to-year variance
in their claim rates. These firms are
granted rate reductions only if the
experience of the entire class improves.
The remaining 14 percent of employers,
larger firms representing approximately
70 percent of employees, have their
premiums set based on a combination of
‘‘class rating’’ and ‘‘experience rating,’’
which adjusts the class rating to reflect
a firm’s individual claims experience. A
firm’s experience rating is generally
based on the history of workers’
compensation payments to employees
injured at that firm’s workplace, not on
the quality of the firm’s overall
employee protection program or safety
and health record. Thus, for example,
the existence of circumstances that may
lead to catastrophic future losses are not
included in an experience rating—only
18 Recall from the earlier discussion of
externalities that the failure to internalize costs
leads to allocative distortions and inefficiencies in
the market.
19 Only the largest firms, constituting
approximately 1 percent of employers and
representing approximately 15 percent of
employees, are self-insured. These individual firms
accomplish risk-spreading as a result of the large
number of employees they cover (Ashford, 2007).
From 2000 to 2020, the share of Workers’
Compensation Benefits paid by self-insured
employers rose from 22.0 percent to 24.7 percent
(Murphy and Wolf, 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
actual past losses are included.20
Insurance companies do have the right
to refuse to provide workers’
compensation insurance to an
employer—and frequently exercise that
right based on their inspections and
evaluations of a firm’s health and safety
practices. However, almost all States
have assigned risk pools that insist that
any firm that cannot obtain workers’
compensation policies from any insurer
must be provided workers’
compensation insurance at a Statemandated rate that reflects a
combination of class and experience
rating. Workers’ compensation
insurance does protect individual
employers against a catastrophic
financial loss due to work-related injury
or illness claims. As a result of risk
spreading, however, employers’ efforts
to reduce the incidence of occupational
injuries and illnesses are not fully
reflected in reduced workers’
compensation premiums. Conversely,
employers who devote fewer resources
to promoting employee safety and
health may not incur commensurately
higher workers’ compensation costs.
This creates a type of moral hazard, in
that the presence of risk spreading in
workers’ compensation insurance may
induce employers to make fewer
investments in equipment and training
to reduce the risk of workplace injuries
and illnesses.
In short, the premiums most
individual employers pay for workers’
compensation insurance coverage do
not reflect the actual cost burden those
employers impose on the worker’s
compensation system. Consequently,
employers considering measures to
lower the incidence of workplace
injuries and illnesses can expect to
receive a less-than-commensurate
reduction in workers’ compensation
premiums. Thus, for all the reasons
discussed above, the workers’
compensation system does not provide
adequate incentives to employers to
control occupational risks to worker
safety and health.
C. Tort Liability Options
Another alternative to OSHA
regulation could be for employees to use
the tort system to seek redress for workrelated injuries and illnesses, including
heat-related ones.21 A tort is a civil
20 In order to spread risks in an efficient manner,
it is critical that insurers have adequate information
to set individual premiums that reflect each
individual employer’s risks. As the preceding
discussion has made clear, by and large, they do
not. In that sense, insurers can be added to
employers and employees as possessing imperfect
information about job hazards.
21 The OSH Act does not provide a private right
of action that would allow affected workers to sue
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
wrong (other than breach of contract) for
which the courts can provide a remedy
by awarding damages. The application
of the tort system to occupational injury
and illness would allow employees to
sue their employer, or other responsible
parties where applicable (e.g., ‘‘third
parties’’ such as suppliers of hazardous
material or equipment used in the
workplace) to recover damages. In
theory, the tort system could shift the
liability for the direct costs of
occupational injury and illness from the
employee to the employer or to other
responsible parties. In turn, the
employer or third parties would be
induced to improve employee safety
and health.
With limited exceptions, the tort
system has not been a viable alternative
to occupational safety and health
regulation. In addition, State statutes
make workers’ compensation the
‘‘exclusive remedy’’ for work-related
injuries and illnesses. Workers’
compensation is essentially a type of nofault insurance. In return for employers’
willingness to provide, through workers’
compensation, timely wage-loss and
medical coverage for workers’ jobrelated injuries and illnesses, regardless
of fault, employees are barred from
suing their employers for damages,
except in cases of intentional harm or,
in some States, gross negligence
(Ashford and Caldart, 1996). Even in
cases of gross negligence where it is
possible for employees to sue,
establishing gross negligence in these
incidences is complicated by heat
conditions as these conditions may be
temporary and localized, and not
necessarily measured at the time of
incident. Practically speaking, in most
cases, workers’ compensation is the
exclusive legal remedy available to
employees for workplace injuries and
illnesses.
Employees are thus generally barred
from suing their own employers in tort
for occupational injuries or illnesses but
may attempt to recover damages for
work-related injuries and illnesses,
where applicable, from third parties
through the tort system. However, it is
unlikely that a third party could be
successfully sued for workplace
exposure to hazardous heat since there
is no third party responsible for
exposing employees to dangerous
conditions in these circumstances. This
means that even this inadequate remedy
would be unavailable to employees
injured from heat exposure.
their employers for safety hazards subject to the Act
(see Am. Fed. of Gov. Employees, AFL–CIO v.
Rumsfeld, 321 F.3d 139, 143–44 (DC Cir. 2003)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
In sum, the use of the tort system as
an alternative to regulation is severely
limited because of the ‘‘exclusive
remedy’’ provisions in workers’
compensation statutes; because of the
various legal and practical difficulties in
seeking recovery from responsible third
parties or the lack of a responsible third
party altogether; and because of the
substantial costs associated with a tort
action. The tort system, therefore, does
not adequately protect employees from
exposure to hazards in the workplace.
IV. Summary
OSHA’s primary reasons for
proposing this standard are based on the
requirements of the OSH Act, which are
discussed in Section II., Pertinent Legal
Authority. As shown in the preamble to
the proposed standard and this PEA,
OSHA has determined that employees
in many industries are exposed to safety
and health hazards from exposure to
environmental and process heat in the
workplace. This section has shown that
labor markets—even when augmented
by information dissemination programs,
workers’ compensation systems, and
tort liability options—still operate at a
level of risk for these employees that is
higher than socially optimal due to a
lack of information about safety and
health risks, the presence of
externalities or imperfect competition,
and other factors discussed above.
B. Profile of Affected Industries
I. Introduction
This section presents a profile of the
entities and employees for all industries
that would be affected by OSHA’s
proposed standard for Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention in Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings. OSHA first
outlines all industries that would be
subject to the proposed standard. Next,
OSHA summarizes the number of
entities and employees that would be
exempt from this proposed standard
based on coverage under existing
standards, jurisdiction of local or State
government entities, or based on one of
the exemptions in paragraph (a)(2) of
this proposed standard. Lastly, OSHA
provides summary statistics for the
affected entities,22 including the
number of affected entities and the
number of affected employees. This
information is provided for each
industry (1) in total, (2) for small
entities as defined by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) and by the Small
22 Spreadsheet detailing all calculations
discussed in this analysis are available in
Analytical Support for OSHA’s Preliminary
Economic Analysis for the Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention (OSHA, 2024c).
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70807
Business Administration (SBA), and (3)
for very small entities with fewer than
20 employees.
II. Potentially Affected Industries and
Employees
This section characterizes the
industries and employees that are likely
to be affected by the proposed standard.
A. Potentially Affected Industries
OSHA broadly characterizes
industries that are potentially within the
scope of the regulatory framework as
core industries 23 and all other covered
industries. OSHA considers core
industries to be those industries where
employees have the most exposure to
heat-related hazards, such as through
exposure to high outdoor temperatures,
radiant heat sources, or insufficient
temperature control or ventilation in
indoor work settings. Core industries
include:
• Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing;
• Building Materials and Equipment
Suppliers;
• Commercial Kitchens;
• Construction;
• Drycleaning and Commercial
Laundries;
• Landscaping and Facilities Support;
• Maintenance and Repair;
• Manufacturing;
• Oil and Gas;
• Postal and Delivery Services;
• Recreation and Amusement;
• Sanitation and Waste Removal;
• Telecommunications;
• Temporary Help Services;
• Transportation;
• Utilities; and
• Warehousing.
While employee exposure to heatrelated hazards is expected to be more
frequent in the core industries,
employees in all other industries within
the agency’s jurisdiction have the
potential to experience occupational
heat-related hazards and would also be
covered by this proposed standard, with
the exception of employers that meet
23 To identify core industries, OSHA reviewed
multiple sources. The agency reviewed its OSHA
Information System (OIS) database to identify
industries with fatal and non-fatal heat-related
injuries and illnesses. In addition, OSHA identified
occupations with the most exposure to heat-related
hazards by analyzing (1) occupational information
on outdoor work settings from the Occupational
Information Network (O*NET) and (2) occupationlevel data from the Occupational Requirements
Survey (ORS) on exposure to process heat.
Occupations flagged by those two data sources were
then mapped to detailed 2012 North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes using
the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics
(OEWS). Finally, OSHA evaluated industries that
were included in OSHA’s National Emphasis
Program for Outdoor and Indoor Heat Related
Hazards, ANPRM comments, and stakeholder
comments.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70808
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
the criteria for one of the scope
exemptions in paragraph (a)(2)
(discussed in detail in section VII.A.,
and below). For example, there are
certain jobs, such as maintenance and
landscaping occupations, regardless of
the industry in which they are
performed, that require physical
exertion which may increase the risk of
heat stress.
Most of the economic data on number
of firms, number of establishments,
employment,24 and annual receipts are
sourced from the Census Bureau’s
Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB)
2017 dataset (Census Bureau, 2021a).
SUSB 25 presents these data 26 by North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code, employee class
size, and State. Unlike most other
standards that OSHA proposes, costs
will differ not just by industry, but also
by the geographical location of
workplaces due to variations in
environmental conditions. See
discussion of geographic location later
in this section.
The SUSB glossary (Census Bureau,
2024b) defines the following terms as
follows. Establishments are defined as
an economic unit, typically a single
physical location where business is
conducted, services are performed, or
industrial operations occur. Firms are
legal business organizations and may
consist of a single establishment or
multiple establishments under common
ownership or control. Employment is a
measure of paid full- and part-time
employees, including employees on
paid sick leave, holidays, and
vacations.27 Annual receipts are defined
as operating revenue for goods and
services summed by industry, net of
24 For some industry-state combinations, the total
employment in the SUSB data was less than the
number of establishments. For these cases, OSHA
adjusted total employment so that total employment
is equal to the number of establishments.
25 SUSB covers most NAICS industries excluding
Crop and Animal Production (NAICS 111, 112); Rail
Transportation (NAICS 482); Postal Service (NAICS
491); Pension, Health, Welfare, and Other Insurance
Funds (NAICS 525110, 525120, 525190); Trusts,
Estates, and Agency Accounts (NAICS 525920);
Offices of Notaries (NAICS 541120); Private
Households (NAICS 814); and Public
Administration (NAICS 92). SUSB also excludes
most establishments reporting government
employees. (https://www.census.gov/programssurveys/susb/about.html) To the extent that there
are some establishments reporting government
employees that are also captured in Government
Units Survey or the Census of Governments
database, OSHA’s estimates may overstate the
number of covered employees and establishments.
26 These annual SUSB figures are based on the
counts of these variables during the week of March
12th of the reference year.
27 Employment includes salaried officers and
executives and excludes sole proprietors and
partners of unincorporated businesses.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
taxes collected from customers or
clients.
There are instances where estimates
are left undisclosed in the SUSB dataset
because there are only a few companies
in a certain industry in a given State.
Relying solely on SUSB datafiles would
result in an undercount of the
potentially affected employers and
employees due to the undisclosed data.
For this reason, OSHA attempted to fill
in these data gaps in these undisclosed
industries with alternative data sources.
These industries with data gaps are
listed below, along with the alternative
sources and methods for estimating the
number of firms, number of
establishments, employment, and
annual receipts. OSHA welcomes
additional data sources or alternative
methodologies to fill these data gaps.
Agriculture: Most agricultural
industries are not included in the SUSB
dataset,28 so OSHA used the Department
of Agriculture’s 2017 Census of
Agriculture (USDA, 2019) to derive
estimates of the necessary industry
profile information. OSHA used the
count of farms from chapter 2, table 44
‘‘Farms by North American Industry
Classification System’’ to represent the
number of establishments for each
agricultural industry. OSHA assumed
that the number of firms is equal to the
number of establishments.29 OSHA used
industry-level estimates of ‘‘workers’’ on
hired labor farms and ‘‘total sales’’ from
chapter 1, table 75 ‘‘Summary by North
American Industry Classification
System’’ to represent employment
counts and annual receipts,
respectively. OSHA welcomes feedback
on alternative sources, estimation
methods, and assumptions for
estimations of firms, establishments,
and employment in the agricultural
sector.
Local Government 30: The SUSB
dataset excludes most government
entities, including local governments.
OSHA primarily relied on data from
three alternative sources for local
government estimates. To estimate the
28 The NAICS industries that were estimated
using this method are Oilseed and Grain Farming
(111100), Vegetable and Melon Farming (111200),
Fruit and Nut Tree Farming (111300), Greenhouse,
Nursery, and Floriculture (111400), Other Crop
Farming (111900), Cattle Ranch and Farming
(112100), Hog and Pig Farming (112200), Poultry
and Egg Production (112300), Sheep and Goat
Farming (112400), Aquaculture (112500), and Other
Animal Production (112900).
29 Family farms account for 96 percent of all U.S.
farms (https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/
archive/2021/01-22-2021.php).
30 In this analysis, OSHA only considered
government entities in OSHA state plan states. See
section VIII.B.III.H. later in this section for a
discussion of exemptions based on OSHA
jurisdiction.
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
number of government entities, number
of establishments, and employment,
OSHA used the county-, city-, and
town-level data from the Census
Bureau’s Government Units Survey
(GUS) for 2022 (Census Bureau, 2023d)
by State to estimate the number of firms
per State. Then, OSHA assumed that
each entity represented one firm which
was equal to one establishment.31 Since
the GUS data do not include estimates
for local government employment by
State, OSHA used the 2022 Census of
Governments’ Survey of Public
Employment & Payroll local
employment data (Census Bureau,
2023b) to develop these estimates.
OSHA distributed these local employees
based on a ratio of local government
employees to population served within
each State as provided in the GUS,
resulting in an estimate of employment
for each local government entity within
the GUS. These estimates were summed
to the State level for OSHA’s analysis.
OSHA’s estimate for annual receipts
per government entity also required two
steps. First, OSHA estimated the average
annual receipts per resident by State.
The estimate was equal to the ratio of
total local government receipts in the
datasets found in the Census Bureau’s
2021 Annual Survey of State and Local
Government Finances (Census Bureau,
2023a) to the total population served in
the GUS dataset. Then, OSHA
multiplied the population associated
with each government entity captured
in the GUS with the ratio from step one
to arrive at an estimate of total annual
receipts per government entity. OSHA
again aggregated these estimates to the
State level for this analysis.
OSHA welcomes feedback on
alternative sources, estimation methods,
and assumptions for estimations of
firms, establishments, and employment
in local governments.
State Government: State government
entities are excluded from the SUSB
dataset, so OSHA relied on two
alternative data sources for counts of
firms and establishments, employment,
and annual receipts. OSHA assumed
that each State government is equal to
one firm and that each State government
firm is equal to one State government
establishment.32
OSHA used the total State
government full-time and part-time
employment data from the 2022 Census
of Governments’ Survey of Public
31 To the extent that there are multiple
establishments for a single local government entity,
this method underestimates the number of
establishments.
32 To the extent that state governments have
multiple establishments, this method
underestimates the number of establishments.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70809
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Employment & Payroll (Census Bureau,
2023b) to represent State government
employment estimates. OSHA used the
State government revenues estimated in
the Census Bureau’s 2021 Annual
Survey of State and Local Government
Finances (Census Bureau, 2023a) to
estimate annual receipts for State
governments.
OSHA welcomes feedback on
alternative sources, estimation methods,
and assumptions for estimations of
firms, establishments, and employment
in State governments.
Rail Transportation,33 Postal Service,
and Insurance and Employee Benefit
Funds: SUSB data relied upon for the
majority of the estimates in this industry
profile do not include estimates for a
small subset of non-agricultural
industries: Rail Transportation (NAICS
4821), Postal and Delivery Services
(NAICS 4911), and Insurance and
Employment Benefit Funds (NAICS
5251). The economic data estimates for
these three industries were derived from
the Quarterly Census of Employment
and Wages (QCEW) collected by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). OSHA
used industry-level establishment and
employment counts by State from the
2022 QCEW dataset (BLS, 2023f). OSHA
assumed that each establishment was
also a unique firm,34 thus each firm
equals one establishment. While the
QCEW does not present revenue data, it
does include total annual wages by
industry and State. OSHA used the ratio
of receipts to wages from the SUSB
dataset for each State to convert the
QCEW wage data into annual receipts
by industry and State.
OSHA welcomes additional data
sources or alternative methodologies to
fill data gaps in the SUSB data for
industries including agriculture, local
and State governments. The agency is
particularly interested in data and
information on the number of firms,
establishments, and employment. OSHA
has assumed that one establishment is
equal to one firm in industries where
data on this parameter are not available
including in governments, agriculture,
postal services, and rail transportation.
The agency welcomes comment on this
approach and suggestions for alternative
approaches.
B. States and Geographic Regions.
For this PEA, OSHA categorized
States into geographic regions based on
the National Weather Service (NWS)
regions.35 Table VIII.B.1. presents the
grouping of States into these regions.
TABLE VIII.B.1—STATES AND GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS
Alaskan
Alaska
Central
Eastern
Colorado
Iowa
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
North Dakota
Nebraska
South Dakota
Wisconsin
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Vermont
Virginia
West Virginia
Pacific
American Samoa
Guam
Hawaii
Northern Mariana Islands
Southern
Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Louisiana
Mississippi
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Puerto Rico
Tennessee
Texas
U.S. Virgin Islands
Western
Arizona
California
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
Oregon
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: NWS, 2024b.
C. Potentially Affected Employees Based
on Work Conditions
OSHA estimated the number of
potentially affected employees across all
affected industries based on their work
conditions. To do so, OSHA used a
combination of O*NET, Occupational
Requirement Survey (ORS), and
Occupational Employment and Wage
Statistics (OEWS) program data.
Employment is characterized using the
Standard Occupational Classification
(SOC) detailed occupations (i.e., sixdigit SOC code).
O*NET (O*NET, 2023) provides data
on the percent of employees in a given
occupation that work in certain climatic
work conditions for specified
frequencies.36 The climatic work
conditions that OSHA evaluated in this
analysis are (1) Indoors,
Environmentally Controlled; (2)
Indoors, Not Environmentally
Controlled; (3) Outdoors, Exposed to
Weather; and (4) Outdoors, Under
Cover. For modeling purposes, OSHA
mapped the O*NET frequency
categories (O*NET, 2023) to number and
percentages of work days worked in
certain climatic work conditions, as
shown in table VIII.B.2. For the
purposes of this analysis, OSHA
assumes that employees in work
conditions (2), (3), and (4) are in-scope
of the proposed standard unless they
meet exemptions discussed later.
33 The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has
promulgated regulations requiring the use of
environmental controls to address heat hazards in
three specific, limited contexts: non-steam-powered
locomotives purchased or remanufactured after
June 8, 2012 (49 CFR 229.119(g)), camp cars (49
CFR 228.313(c)), and certain on-track roadway
maintenance machines (49 CFR 214.505(a)).
OSHA’s standard would apply to the working
conditions of railroad employees in all other
contexts, including within trains and machinery not
covered by these regulations and during all outdoor
work.
34 To the extent that there are multiple
establishments per firm, this will lead to an
overestimate. OSHA welcomes feedback on this
assumption and information on alternative data
sources for the number of firms in these industries.
35 In the NWS groupings, three states were
divided between two regions: Georgia (Eastern and
Southern), Kentucky (Central and Eastern), and
Wyoming (Central and Western). OSHA assigned
these states to a single region, with Georgia assigned
to the Southern region, Kentucky to the Central
region, and Wyoming to the Western region.
36 These frequency categories are defined as: (1)
‘‘Never;’’ (2) ‘‘Once a year or more but not every
month;’’ (3) ‘‘Once a month or more but not every
week;’’ (4) ‘‘Once a week or more but not every
day;’’ (5) ‘‘Every day.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70810
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.2—FREQUENCY OF WORK IN CERTAIN CONDITIONS
Category No.
1
2
3
4
5
O*NET frequency category name
.............................................................
.............................................................
.............................................................
.............................................................
.............................................................
Minimum
number of days
for category
Never .....................................................
Less than Monthly .................................
Less than Weekly ..................................
Less than Daily .....................................
Every Day ..............................................
Maximum
number of days
for category
0
1
12
50
250
0
<12
<50
<250
250
Estimated
percentage of
days a
0
2.60
12.40
60
100
Sources: Frequency categories are defined by O*NET Online Resource Center (O*NET, 2023).
Estimated percentage of days are based on methodology from Park et al. (2021).
a These percentages are based on a 250-day work year.
There are multiple SOC occupation
codes for which the O*NET dataset does
not provide the percentages of
employees in an occupation for each of
these brackets. In these instances, OSHA
used the average frequency of work in
these conditions from similar SOC
occupation codes as representative of
the missing SOC occupation code to
estimate the frequency of work in these
conditions for occupations with missing
data.
Using the percentages of each
occupation within the frequency
categories and the estimated percentages
of days worked by category presented in
the table above, OSHA estimated the
percentage of employees that would be
working regularly in certain climatic
work conditions by occupation. OSHA
then multiplied these percentages by the
percentage of total industry employment
in a given occupation from the 2022
OEWS dataset (BLS, 2023c). The
aggregation of these products by 4-digit
NAICS code yields OSHA’s estimate of
the percentage of all employees in a
given industry that work in the four
climatic work conditions.
OSHA assumes that employees
working indoors in environmentally
controlled workspaces are not covered
under the proposed standard unless
they are exposed to process heat (e.g.,
kitchens, foundries). It is possible that
employees exposed to process heat in
indoor work settings are counted in the
O*NET data as being in climatic work
condition (2) Indoors, Not
Environmentally Controlled, and
therefore already captured in counts of
potentially affected employees.
However, to account for the possibility
that some employees exposed to process
heat are categorized in climatic work
condition (1) Indoors, Environmentally
Controlled (which is possible if survey
respondents considered areas that were
environmentally controlled but hot due
to process heat to be within the
definition of environmentally
controlled), OSHA relied on the ORS
dataset (BLS, 2023d) to identify
occupations exposed to process heat. To
the extent that employees exposed to
process heat are included in both
climatic work condition (2) Indoors, Not
Environmentally Controlled and the
ORS data on exposure to extreme heat,
this method may overstate the number
of employees exposed to process heat.
The ORS dataset contains estimates for
the percent of employees that are
exposed (or not) to extreme heat.37 The
ORS data are available by SOC
occupation code, although not all SOC
codes have an estimate available for all
data series. Similar to the estimation for
climatic conditions described above, the
percentage of employees exposed to
extreme heat was multiplied by the
percentage of total industry employment
in a given occupation from the 2022
OEWS dataset (BLS, 2023c), resulting in
an estimate of the percentage of
employees by industry exposed to
process heat.
OSHA acknowledges that the
temperature criteria for the ORS
definition of exposure to extreme heat
has a higher temperature criterion than
the proposed standard’s initial heat
trigger of 80 °F, which, to the extent
employees are not otherwise included
in this analysis because they are in
climatic work condition (2) Indoors, Not
Environmentally Controlled, may result
in an undercount of employees exposed
to process heat.
The percentage of employees exposed
to process heat using this method was
added to the percentage of employees in
exposed climatic conditions to
determine the total percentage of
employees exposed to heat for all
affected industries.38 To estimate the
total number of potentially affected
employees for each industry, OSHA
multiplied the percentage of total
exposed employees in the industry by
the OEWS for May 2022 (BLS, 2023c)
employment totals for that industry.
Table VIII.B.3. shows a summary of
potentially affected firms,
establishments, and employees across
all these industries by region.
TABLE VIII.B.3—INDUSTRY PROFILE SUMMARIZED BY REGION
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Region
Entities
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
37 ORS considers extreme heat present when (1)
employees’ exposure is related to critical tasks and
not due to weather and (2) the atmosphere is dry
with temperatures above 90 °F, or the atmosphere
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
18,563
1,578,125
2,157,549
33,857
1,776,945
1,432,624
is humid with temperatures above 85 °F (BLS,
2021).
38 To the extent that the employees exposed to
process heat are already accounted for as being in
one of the affected climatic conditions (indoors-not
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Establishments
21,940
1,906,757
2,631,175
40,139
2,205,794
1,720,933
Employees
314,444
32,567,699
47,954,519
704,767
38,771,537
29,839,496
environmentally controlled, outdoors- exposed to
weather, and outdoors- under cover), this method
may overestimate the percentage of employees and
establishments that are affected by the proposed
standard.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70811
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.3—INDUSTRY PROFILE SUMMARIZED BY REGION—Continued
Region
Entities
Total ....................................................................................................................
Establishments
6,997,663
Employees
8,526,738
150,152,463
Source: OSHA, based on BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2023f; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023b; Census Bureau,
2023d; Census Bureau, 2023a; USDA, 2019; and USFA, 2019.
III. Entities Not Covered by the
Proposed Standard
The proposed standard would apply
to all employers in the industries
outlined in Section VIII.B.II., Potentially
Affected Industries and Employees,
unless they have a workforce that is
exclusively performing work activities
that meet one or more of following
definitions: (1) work activities for which
there is no reasonable expectation of
exposure at or above the initial heat
trigger; (2) work activities where the
employee is exposed to temperatures
above the initial heat trigger for fifteen
minutes or less in any sixty-minute
period; (3) emergency response
activities of workplace emergency
response teams or any emergency
response activities already covered
under 29 CFR 1910.120, 1910.146,
1910.156, part 1915, subpart P, 1926.65,
and 1926.1211; (4) work activities
performed in indoor work areas or
vehicles where air conditioning
consistently keeps ambient temperature
below 80 °F; (5) telework; and (6)
sedentary work activities in indoor work
areas where the work only involves
some combination of the following:
sitting, occasional standing and walking
for brief periods of time, and occasional
lifting of objects weighing less than ten
pounds. Employees that are exclusively
performing these types of work
activities are also exempt from this
standard. Where employers and
employees are outside OSHA’s
jurisdiction, they are also not covered
by the standard and OSHA’s estimates
of the types and number of such
employers and employees is discussed
in this section.
A. Work Activities With No Reasonable
Expectation of Exposure at or Above
Initial Heat Trigger
OSHA assumes that the estimates of
affected employees cover all employees
potentially affected by the proposed
standard (reported in Section VIII.B.II.,
Potentially Affected Industries and
Employees) and excludes those
employees who are exempt under the
scope exemption for work activities
with no reasonable expectation of
exposure at or above the initial heat
trigger. Employees that are working in
‘‘Indoors, Environmentally Controlled’’
settings as identified by the O*NET data
are considered out of scope based on
this exemption unless they are also
exposed to process heat. OSHA believes
that this methodology, combined with
the additional exemptions discussed
below, removes from scope the
employees who would fall under this
exemption and thus does not make any
additional adjustments for this specific
exemption.
B. Short Duration Exposure at or Above
Initial Heat Trigger
To estimate the number of employees
that might be exposed to temperatures at
or above the initial heat trigger for
fifteen minutes or less in any sixtyminute period, OSHA relied on the ORS
dataset. For indoor work settings, OSHA
used the percentages of employees not
exposed to extreme heat and the
percentage of employees seldomly 39
exposed to extreme heat as reflective of
those employees that are exposed to
temperatures at or above the initial heat
trigger for fifteen minutes or less in any
sixty-minute period. For outdoor work
settings, OSHA used the percentages of
employees that either do not work
outdoors or seldomly work outdoors to
estimate the number of employees
exposed to temperatures at or above the
initial heat trigger for fifteen minutes or
less in any sixty-minute period. OSHA
added the percentages for each SOC
occupation code (OSHA, 2024d).
Using the 2022 OEWS data (BLS,
2023c) described in Section VIII.B.II.,
Potentially Affected Industries and
Employees, OSHA multiplied the
percentage of total industry employment
in a given occupation and the
summation of the percentages of
employees in that same occupation that
are either not exposed or seldomly
exposed to extreme heat to estimate the
percentage of employees in an SOC
occupation code in a certain industry
that meet the exemption criteria for
indoor employees. These estimates were
aggregated for each 4-digit NAICS
industry to estimate the percentage of
total employment in that industry that
is exposed to temperatures at or above
the initial heat trigger for fifteen
minutes or less in any sixty-minute
period. For 4-digit NAICS industries
otherwise captured in OSHA’s
economic analysis that are not available
in the OEWS dataset, OSHA used the
average percentage of employees
meeting this definition within the same
industry sector (2-digit NAICS). This
same process also applies for the
percentages of employees that either do
not work outdoors or seldomly work
outdoors.
Table VIII.B.4. shows the number of
employees that OSHA estimates are
exempt from the proposed standard
because of qualification as employees
with only short duration exposure.
TABLE VIII.B.4—SUMMARY OF EMPLOYEES EXEMPT DUE TO SHORT DURATION EXPOSURE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Region
Indoor employees
Alaskan ............................................................................................................................................
Central .............................................................................................................................................
Eastern .............................................................................................................................................
Pacific ..............................................................................................................................................
Southern ..........................................................................................................................................
Western ............................................................................................................................................
39 ORS defines seldom as spending up to two
percent of total time working in extreme heat, or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
199,838
21,511,842
32,085,256
458,099
25,520,407
19,598,994
less than ten minutes daily, less than 45 minutes
weekly, or less than one week annually (BLS, 2021).
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Outdoor employees
27,312
2,957,214
4,285,342
66,205
3,497,694
2,676,549
70812
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.4—SUMMARY OF EMPLOYEES EXEMPT DUE TO SHORT DURATION EXPOSURE—Continued
Region
Indoor employees
Total ..........................................................................................................................................
Outdoor employees
99,374,435
13,510,315
Source: OSHA, based on Census Bureau, 2021a; USDA, 2019; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; USFA, 2023; BLS, 2023c;
and BLS, 2023d.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
C. Emergency Response Activities
OSHA’s proposed standard exempts
organizations whose primary function is
the performance of firefighting;
emergency response activities of
workplace emergency response teams,
emergency medical services, or
technical search and rescue; and any
emergency response activities already
covered under 29 CFR 1910.120,
1910.146, 1910.156, part 1915, subpart
P, 1926.65, and 1926.1211. See the
Explanation of the Proposed
Requirement for Paragraph (a) Scope for
a full discussion of this exemption.40
To identify exempt career firefighters,
OSHA used the U.S. Fire
Administration’s National Fire
Department Registry (USFA, 2023) to
determine the number of firefighters in
each State. Each fire department
recorded in the National Fire
Department Registry is considered a
firm in the industry profile and each fire
station is considered an establishment.
Employment figures are based on the
aggregation of counts of active career
firefighters. Volunteer and paid-per-call
firefighters are not included as
employees in the data on government
employees that form the basis of
OSHA’s estimates of government
employees, so no adjustment was made
to employment regarding these
responders. (See OSHA–2007–0073–
0118, chapter VII, for additional
information). OSHA welcomes comment
on these estimates including whether
there are additional types of
establishments or employees who
should be considered out of scope for
this analysis and suggestions on
methodologies that could better
represent this exemption.
D. Sedentary Work Activities at Indoor
Work Areas
To estimate the number of employees
engaged in indoor sedentary work
activities as defined in the proposed
standard, OSHA used ORS and OEWS
data. The ORS dataset includes
estimates for the percent of employees
involved in work where the strength
required is considered sedentary.41
These data are available by SOC code,
although not all codes have an estimate
available for all data series.
As described in section VIII.B.III.B.,
OEWS provides employment data for all
SOC occupation codes within each 4digit NAICS industry. OSHA multiplied
the percentage of total industry
employment in a given occupation by
the percentage of employees in a given
SOC code considered sedentary (OSHA,
2024d). Similar to the estimates for
short duration exposure, these
percentages were aggregated for each 4digit NAICS industry to estimate the
percentage of total employment in that
NAICS industry that is considered
sedentary. For 4-digit NAICS industries
otherwise captured in OSHA’s
economic analysis that are not available
in the OEWS dataset, OSHA used the
average percentage of employees
meeting this definition within the same
sector.
Table VIII.B.5. shows the number of
employees that OSHA estimates are
exempt from the proposed standard
because their work is sedentary.
TABLE VIII.B.5—SUMMARY OF SEDENTARY EMPLOYEES EXEMPT FROM THE PROPOSED STANDARD
Region
Employees
Alaskan ........................................................................................................................................................................................
Central .........................................................................................................................................................................................
Eastern .........................................................................................................................................................................................
Pacific ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
Southern ......................................................................................................................................................................................
Western ........................................................................................................................................................................................
66,112
7,236,687
11,038,630
142,075
8,543,839
6,830,356
Total ......................................................................................................................................................................................
33,857,699
Source: OSHA, based on Census Bureau, 2021a; USDA, 2019; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; USFA, 2023; BLS, 2023c;
and BLS, 2023d.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
E. Telework
To estimate the number of employees
working remotely, OSHA used the 2022
BLS Business Response Survey (BRS)
data (BLS, 2024a) on telework. The BRS
provides percentages of employment by
sector that are working remotely, on-site
40 OSHA did not attempt to adjust the share of
employee’s time spent engaged in emergency
response activities and aside from firefighters, did
not remove any employees from the scope of the
standard due to this exemption. To the extent that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(i.e., non-remote work), or hybrid.
OSHA applied these percentages of
employment by sector to the
employment data derived from the
sources outlined in Section VIII.B.II.,
Potentially Affected Industries and
Employees. Remote employees are
considered exempt from the proposed
standard and hybrid employees are
considered exempt from the proposed
standard during the time they are
teleworking.
Table VIII.B.6. shows the number of
employees that OSHA estimates work
remotely, hybrid, and on-site.
there are additional establishments where
employees exclusively perform emergency response
activities, this analysis may overstate the number of
affected establishments and employees.
41 Sedentary work involves less than or equal to
one-third of the workday standing while only
seldomly or occasionally lifting or carrying up to
ten pounds.
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70813
TABLE VIII.B.6—SUMMARY OF ON-SITE, REMOTE, AND HYBRID EMPLOYEES
Region
Remote
Hybrid
On-site
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
9,933
1,100,860
1,716,903
22,912
1,391,099
1,100,879
93,485
10,324,319
15,412,798
195,421
12,060,519
9,289,249
206,311
20,885,970
30,383,027
483,328
25,087,691
19,318,010
Total ....................................................................................................................
5,342,586
47,375,792
96,364,336
Source: OSHA, based on BLS 2024a; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; USDA, 2019; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
F. Indoor Work Areas Where
Temperature Is Maintained Below 80 °F
To estimate the number of
establishments that might qualify as
having indoor work areas where the
ambient temperature is maintained
below 80 °F (26.7 °C), OSHA used the
Energy Information Administration
(EIA) Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey (CBECS) data
(EIA, 2022). The CBECS data provide
estimates on the number of buildings by
building activity with some percentage
of cooled floorspace. OSHA assumed
that buildings with at least 51 percent
of floorspace cooled qualify as
establishments where work activities
take place in ambient temperatures
below 80 °F (26.7 °C). OSHA assumed
that employees likely work in
environmentally controlled areas of
buildings regardless of what percent of
floorspace is cooled. For example,
loading docks, storage areas, or areas
where processes are automated may not
be cooled but they also may not be
regular work locations for employees.42
OSHA mapped these building activities
to sectors to estimate the percentage of
establishments in a given sector that
would fit the definition of this
exemption. These estimates were
applied to the number of
establishments, as well as the number of
firms, to determine those firms and
establishments that are exempt from the
proposed standard based on this
exemption. OSHA welcomes comment
on whether this is a reasonable
assumption. If not, the agency welcomes
comment on more appropriate
methodologies or data source that might
better allow OSHA to estimate which
establishments would be covered by this
proposed standard.
Table VIII.B.7. shows the number of
firms and establishments where the
ambient temperature indoors is
maintained below 80 °F (26.7 °C).
TABLE VIII.B.7—SUMMARY OF ENTITIES AND ESTABLISHMENTS WITH SUFFICIENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS
Region
Entities
Establishments
Alaskan ....................................................................................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................................................................................
11,047
883,924
1,362,384
20,783
1,096,146
922,625
13,469
1,142,591
1,739,119
25,630
1,428,219
1,146,582
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
4,296,908
5,495,610
Source: OSHA, based on Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; EIA, 2022; USDA, 2019; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
To estimate the number of employees
working in cooled vehicles, OSHA first
estimated the percentage of employees
working in vehicles by NAICS code. The
estimated percentage of drivers is based
on the percentage of total industry
employment in occupations that involve
driving. OSHA acknowledges that some
non-driving occupations may work in
vehicles and assumes that these
occupations are already captured in
estimates of other work conditions (e.g.,
they may be included in the group
working indoors in environmentally
controlled settings or working outdoors
in covered areas). OSHA determined
that the following SOC occupation
codes represent occupations that
involve driving vehicles exposed to
outdoor heat conditions for most of their
work activities:
• Postal Service Mail Carriers (43–
5052);
• Agricultural Equipment Operators
(45–2091);
• Paving, Surfacing, and Tamping
Equipment Operators (47–2071);
• Pile Driver Operators (47–2072);
• Operating Engineers and Other
Construction Equipment Operators (47–
2073);
• Ambulance Drivers and Attendants,
Except Emergency Medical Technicians
(53–3011);
• Driver/Sales Workers (53–3031);
• Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck
Drivers (53–3032);
• Light Truck Drivers (53–3033);
• Bus Drivers, School (53–3051);
• Bus Drivers, Transit and Intercity
(53–3052);
• Shuttle Drivers and Chauffeurs (53–
3053);
• Taxi Drivers (53–3054); and
42 To the extent this assumption is incorrect, this
may result in too few establishments being
considered in-scope of this proposed standard
which potentially underestimates total
establishment-based costs. However, this
adjustment does not affect the number of covered
employees who are included or excluded based on
their job characteristics. The estimated employees
who are covered by this proposed standard are
distributed among the covered establishments. If
OSHA is counting too few establishments as
covered, this would mean that the affected
employees are concentrated into fewer
establishments than they truly are and the average
cost per establishment may be too high.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
G. Employees Working in Cooled
Vehicles
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70814
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
• Refuse and Recyclable Material
Collectors (53–7081).
OSHA then multiplied the percentage
of total industry employment comprised
of these SOC occupation codes by the
percentage of drivers in vehicles with
sufficiently cooled vehicle cabs. In the
absence of data on the percentage of
vehicles with sufficiently cooled vehicle
cabs, OSHA estimates that 34 percent of
postal service (Hooker and Baker, 2023)
and assumes that 50 percent of all other
delivery service drivers work in
sufficiently cooled vehicle cabs. OSHA
welcomes additional data on the percent
of vehicle cabs that are sufficiently
cooled for all types of drivers.
Table VIII.B.8. shows the total number
of employees working as drivers and
those OSHA estimates to be in-scope
(i.e., those who are not working in
sufficiently cooled vehicle cabs).
TABLE VIII.B.8—SUMMARY OF DRIVERS, TOTAL AND IN-SCOPE
Region
Drivers
In-scope drivers
Alaskan ....................................................................................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................................................................................
10,572
1,062,955
1,501,620
21,039
1,249,063
963,917
5,419
543,165
768,853
10,736
637,255
490,865
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
4,809,165
2,456,292
Source: OSHA, based on Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; U.S. Census Bureau, 2023d; Hooker and Baker, 2023; USDA,
2019; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
H. Exemptions Based on OSHA
Jurisdiction
Beyond the exemptions laid out in the
scope section of the proposed regulatory
text, OSHA must factor in jurisdictional
considerations when determining those
establishments and employees that are
in scope of the proposed standard. A
subset of public entities is considered
in-scope depending on whether or not
the public entity is located in an OSHA
State Plan State. Those public entities
that are in non-State Plan States, as well
as their employees, are considered out
of scope. The following States and
territories have State Plans: 43 Alaska,
Arizona, California, Connecticut,
Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,
Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New
York, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto
Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, U.S.
Virgin Islands, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, and Wyoming.
I. Summary of Exempt Employees
Table VIII.B.9. summarizes the total
number of employees estimated to be
exempt from the proposed standard by
each exemption. OSHA welcomes
comment and feedback on whether the
approaches detailed above used to
estimate the number of employees
affected by the proposed standard’s
exemptions are appropriate. The agency
welcomes additional data or
information on how to appropriately
account for the exemptions in the
proposed standard.
TABLE VIII.B.9—SUMMARY OF EMPLOYEES BY EXEMPTION TYPE BY REGION
Indoor
short
duration
Region
Outdoor
short
duration
Sedentary
Remote
Hybrid
Drivers
Alaskan ....................................................
Central ......................................................
Eastern .....................................................
Pacific .......................................................
Southern ...................................................
Western ....................................................
199,838
21,511,842
32,085,256
458,099
25,520,407
19,598,994
27,312
2,957,214
4,285,342
66,205
3,497,694
2,676,549
66,112
7,236,687
11,038,630
142,075
8,543,839
6,830,356
9,933
1,100,860
1,716,903
22,912
1,391,099
1,100,879
93,485
10,324,319
15,412,798
195,421
12,060,519
9,289,249
5,153
519,790
732,767
10,302
611,808
473,052
Total ..................................................
99,374,435
13,510,315
33,857,699
5,342,586
47,375,792
2,352,873
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA, based on BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2023d; BLS, 2024a; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 20203b;
Hooker and Baker, 2023; USDA, 2019; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Many employees fit multiple exemption types outlined in this table. The total number of exempt employees is less than the summation of
employees across all exemption types. Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
OSHA welcomes comment and
feedback on whether these approaches
to estimate the number of employees
affected by the proposed standard’s
exemptions are appropriate. The agency
welcomes additional data or
information on how to appropriately
account for the exemptions in the
proposed standard.
43 Seven of these—Connecticut, Illinois, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and U.S.
Virgin Islands—only cover public sector employees.
The private sector employees in those states are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
IV. Affected Employees
The categories that employees
impacted by the proposed exemptions
fall into are likely to overlap. Employees
that perform office work may (1) work
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
indoors in climate control, (2) only
perform sedentary work activities, and
(3) may occasionally work remotely. In
these situations, such employees may be
included in the total estimate for each
of these exemptions discussed above,
therefore simply adding the totals of
covered by Federal OSHA and have been included
in this analysis.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
those exemptions may overstate the
number of exempt employees. This
section adjusts for that overlap and
presents the number of estimated
employees by work condition. This
section also presents estimates on the
number of affected employees by work
shift which is used for specific cost
estimates discussed in Section VIII.C.,
Costs of Compliance.
A. Affected Employees by Work
Conditions
This section estimates the percentage
of affected employees by work
conditions, using the number of
employees potentially exposed to heat
from section VIII.B.II. and the
exemptions outlined in section
VIII.B.III. OSHA recognizes that some
employees are likely to fall under
multiple exemptions. For example, an
employee that teleworks and performs
sedentary work in a climate-controlled
environment is included in three
exemption categories (telework,
sedentary, and no reasonable
expectation of exposure to heat). To
avoid double-counting employees,
OSHA relied on the following method to
estimate the number of affected
employees.
First, the agency excluded publicsector employees that are not within
OSHA’s jurisdiction, as discussed in
section VIII.B.III.H. After excluding
employees outside OSHA’s jurisdiction,
the agency applied the estimated
percentages of employees engaged in
sedentary work, as estimated in section
VIII.B.III.D., to the percentage of
employees working in indoor, not
environmentally controlled work
conditions since those employees
performing sedentary work indoors are
exempt regardless of the presence of
climate control. OSHA assumes that the
majority of employees estimated to be
exempt due to telework, detailed in
section VIII.B.III.E., are also captured by
the sedentary work exemption, and
therefore did not make an additional
adjustment for these employees.
Next, OSHA applied the estimated
percentage of employees exposed to
extreme heat according to the ORS data
(BLS, 2023d) to the percentage of
employees working in indoor,
environmentally controlled work
conditions to account for employees
exposed to process heat who are
covered by this proposed standard. The
percentages of outdoor employees (both
under cover and exposed to weather) are
70815
adjusted to remove from scope
employees that have short duration
outdoor exposure as estimated in
section VIII.B.III.B. OSHA assumed that
indoor employees that are exempt based
on short duration exposure are likely to
be captured in the sedentary work
exemption and did not make an
additional adjustment for these
employees.
These percentages were aggregated for
each 4-digit NAICS industry to estimate
the percentage of total employment in
that industry that work in either indoor,
environmentally controlled conditions
(while only accounting for those
employees that are exposed to process
heat); indoor, not environmentally
controlled conditions (while only
accounting for those employees that are
not sedentary); or outdoor conditions.
For 4-digit NAICS industries otherwise
captured in OSHA’s economic analysis
that are not available in the OEWS
dataset, OSHA used the average
percentage of employees meeting these
definitions within the same sector.
Table VIII.B.10. shows the number of
employees that are considered within
the scope of the proposed standard,
broken out by work conditions.
TABLE VIII.B.10—SUMMARY OF EMPLOYEES BY WORK CONDITION
Indoor, not
environmentally
controlled
Region
Indoor,
process
heat
Outdoor
Total
Alaskan ......................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................
38,078
4,119,613
5,677,620
80,274
4,473,460
3,780,957
6,240
688,813
1,011,200
19,346
822,673
665,729
39,652
3,110,084
4,545,121
74,030
3,448,321
3,353,115
83,969
7,918,510
11,233,941
173,649
8,744,454
7,799,801
Total ....................................................................................................
18,170,002
3,214,001
14,570,322
35,954,325
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA, based on BLS, 2023d; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; O*NET, 2023; USDA, 2019;
and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
B. Affected Employees by Shift Type
I. Daytime
To estimate the number of employees
that work during certain periods of the
day and therefore during different heat
conditions, OSHA used the American
Time Use Survey (ATUS) for 2017–2018
(BLS, 2023a). The ATUS outlines the
percent of employees that work certain
shifts by sector. For the purposes of
estimating the variations in heat
exposure over the course of a day,
OSHA has categorized these into three
shifts: daytime, evening, and overnight.
OSHA mapped work shifts defined in
the ATUS to these three categories in
the following sections.
The daytime work shift category
corresponds to the regular daytime
schedule grouping in the ATUS. The
ATUS defines regular daytime schedule
as having a majority of respondents that
worked between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. For
this analysis, employees categorized as
daytime employees are assumed to work
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to adjust for
overlap with the other work shift
categories.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
II. Evening
The evening work shift category
corresponds to the evening shift in the
ATUS. The evening schedule is defined
as having respondents work a majority
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
of the time between 2 p.m. and
midnight. For this analysis, employees
categorized as evening employees are
assumed to work between 4 p.m. and
midnight.
III. Overnight
The overnight work shift category
corresponds to the night shift in the
ATUS. The night schedule is defined as
having respondents work a majority of
the time between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. For
this analysis, employees categorized as
overnight employees are assumed to
work between midnight and 8 a.m.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70816
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
IV. Other Shift Categories
There are additional shift groups in
the ATUS whose definitions do not fit
neatly into a certain timeframe (e.g.,
rotating, irregular, split shift, other). The
percentages of employees that fit these
additional groups were evenly
distributed across the other categories.
V. Estimates of the Number of In-Scope
Employees by Work Shift
Employees working in the early
afternoon will be exposed to warmer
temperatures than those working during
the evening or night hours, and thus
will more often qualify for a required
rest break, as an example.
Table VIII.B.11. shows the number of
employees that OSHA estimates work
certain work shifts.
Estimating the number of employees
that work certain shifts is important
because some requirements of the
proposed standard are dependent on
whether the heat index is at or above a
trigger while employees are working.
TABLE VIII.B.11—SUMMARY OF IN-SCOPE EMPLOYEES BY WORK SHIFT AND WORK CONDITION
Indoor, not
environmentally
controlled
Region
Indoor,
process
heat
Outdoor
Total
Daytime
Alaskan ....................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................
32,572
3,520,992
4,858,352
67,919
3,837,670
3,241,443
4,683
513,412
752,843
13,914
601,003
492,814
34,729
2,727,273
3,989,031
64,780
3,046,594
2,952,787
71,985
6,761,677
9,600,226
146,614
7,485,266
6,687,044
Subtotal .............................................................................
15,558,949
2,378,669
12,815,194
30,752,813
Evening
Alaskan ....................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................
3,151
344,832
476,846
7,580
376,759
315,621
1,114
126,294
186,505
4,029
163,150
125,450
2,643
211,761
309,284
5,298
228,820
221,400
6,908
682,888
972,635
16,906
768,729
662,471
Subtotal .............................................................................
1,524,789
606,543
979,205
3,110,537
Overnight
Alaskan ....................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................
2,355
253,789
342,421
4,774
259,031
223,893
442
49,106
71,853
1,403
58,520
47,465
2,280
171,050
246,806
3,952
172,907
178,928
5,076
473,945
661,079
10,129
490,459
450,287
Subtotal .............................................................................
1,086,263
228,789
775,922
2,090,975
Total
Alaskan ....................................................................................
Central .....................................................................................
Eastern .....................................................................................
Pacific ......................................................................................
Southern ..................................................................................
Western ....................................................................................
38,078
4,119,613
5,677,620
80,274
4,473,460
3,780,957
6,240
688,813
1,011,200
19,346
822,673
665,729
39,652
3,110,084
4,545,121
74,030
3,448,321
3,353,115
83,969
7,918,510
11,233,941
173,649
8,744,454
7,799,801
Total ..................................................................................
18,170,002
3,214,001
14,570,322
35,954,325
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA, based on BLS, 2023a; BLS, 2023c; BLS 2023d; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 203d;
O*NET, 2023; USDA, 2019; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
V. Affected Entities
This section summarizes the total
estimated number of entities, small
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
entities, and very small entities
impacted by the proposed standard.
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
A. Summary of Affected Entities
Table VIII.B.12. summarizes the
number of affected entities by core
industry and region.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70817
TABLE VIII.B.12—PROFILE OF AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE INDUSTRY AND REGION
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
483
35,466
18,684
253
32,393
18,176
490
35,586
18,729
253
32,534
18,287
892
281,481
160,691
1,666
237,522
453,041
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
105,455
105,879
1,135,293
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
38
2,912
4,280
72
3,692
2,889
51
4,090
5,858
93
5,338
3,876
1,142
105,785
131,370
2,030
122,798
92,573
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
13,884
19,306
455,698
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
517
36,975
66,334
1,353
43,422
39,486
623
49,684
83,069
1,605
60,794
52,286
6,270
739,565
1,100,671
23,824
987,885
733,222
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
188,087
248,060
3,591,437
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
2,468
161,546
234,565
3,436
168,126
155,060
2,518
163,268
236,970
3,477
171,053
157,053
11,776
867,865
1,264,969
24,954
1,232,019
947,205
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
725,200
734,340
4,348,789
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
18
1,994
5,711
43
3,145
2,396
20
2,485
6,383
50
3,767
2,706
114
13,861
25,423
554
20,037
14,349
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
13,307
15,411
74,338
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
111
11,606
18,686
238
13,103
9,836
127
13,203
21,487
313
15,123
11,827
4,334
273,784
443,136
8,574
367,104
262,938
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
53,581
62,080
1,359,870
189
20,398
27,230
329
21,642
217
21,964
29,112
350
23,646
1,291
143,311
185,126
2,261
172,454
Commercial Kitchens
Construction
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Landscaping and Facilities Support
Maintenance and Repair
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70818
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.12—PROFILE OF AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE INDUSTRY AND
REGION—Continued
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Western ......................................................................................................................
17,080
18,515
129,094
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
86,868
93,804
633,538
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
174
31,890
37,652
307
27,569
26,893
207
34,082
39,539
316
29,654
28,053
3,489
1,149,535
1,064,032
3,243
852,094
551,798
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
124,483
131,849
3,624,192
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
72
3,210
1,631
0
11,216
1,794
98
3,976
2,146
0
14,406
2,110
3,809
27,709
18,110
0
173,419
18,053
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
17,924
22,736
241,099
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
207
8,796
11,053
112
7,782
4,874
229
9,820
12,421
131
9,144
5,860
273
48,711
77,808
776
55,205
46,414
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
32,824
37,605
229,188
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
261
9,879
14,551
185
9,316
7,815
272
10,799
16,161
200
10,524
9,004
1,156
117,890
196,438
2,558
153,835
138,003
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
42,006
46,961
609,880
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
19
648
982
15
642
441
22
815
1,176
18
853
576
691
21,373
36,177
635
28,844
22,484
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
2,747
3,460
110,204
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
7
418
532
6
479
384
30
1,853
2,536
28
2,227
1,554
619
32,035
48,653
580
44,194
28,506
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
1,825
8,228
154,587
Manufacturing
Oil and Gas
Postal and Delivery Services
Recreation and Amusement
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Sanitation and Waste Removal
Telecommunications
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70819
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.12—PROFILE OF AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE INDUSTRY AND
REGION—Continued
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Temporary Help Services
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
6
910
1,469
14
1,192
837
9
1,623
2,286
22
1,941
1,395
363
340,619
435,338
10,226
704,748
382,328
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
4,428
7,276
1,873,621
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
515
36,839
32,523
374
31,794
23,246
645
39,510
35,567
443
36,180
25,732
4,950
214,151
218,252
7,332
290,503
170,998
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
125,290
138,077
906,187
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
59
1,481
1,628
20
2,678
1,470
98
4,192
5,255
36
5,894
3,002
817
61,651
86,266
336
73,865
41,136
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
7,336
18,477
264,071
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
21
2,247
2,877
42
2,631
2,068
22
3,195
4,040
51
3,966
3,000
126
74,468
109,065
452
92,288
70,103
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
9,887
14,274
346,503
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
1,907
138,849
221,457
3,497
169,479
140,429
2,218
171,223
269,307
4,224
211,935
169,045
41,857
3,404,715
5,632,414
83,648
3,135,642
3,697,556
Subtotal ...............................................................................................................
675,618
827,952
15,995,832
Alaskan ......................................................................................................................
Central .......................................................................................................................
Eastern .......................................................................................................................
Pacific ........................................................................................................................
Southern ....................................................................................................................
Western ......................................................................................................................
7,073
506,064
701,843
10,295
550,301
455,175
7,895
571,365
792,041
11,611
638,982
513,879
83,969
7,918,510
11,233,941
173,649
8,744,454
7,799,801
Total ....................................................................................................................
2,230,750
2,535,774
35,954,325
Transportation
Utilities
Warehousing
Non-Core
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total
Source: OSHA, based on Census Bureau, 2021a; USDA, 2019; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; and USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70820
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
B. Determining Entity Size
OSHA also estimates the number of
firms, establishments, and employees
that are considered small by both SBA
regulations in 13 CFR 121.201 and the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). Private
entities are defined as small according
to various employment- or revenuebased definitions by 6-digit NAICS code
as laid out in the SBA table of size
standards (SBA, 2023). Public entities
(or ‘‘small governments’’) are defined as
small if they serve a population of less
than 50,000.44 OSHA also looks at the
economic impacts on very small
entities, which, for all industries, the
agency defines as those employing
fewer than 20 employees.
For this PEA, OSHA analyzed costs at
the 4-digit NAICS code and State level.
Since there are no SBA definitions of
small entities at the 4-digit level, OSHA
aggregated the number of firms,
establishments, and employees within
each 6-digit NAICS industry to the 4digit level. For employee-based SBA
definitions, OSHA summed all
economic data within employee-class
sizes below the SBA-determined cut-off
number of employees. For revenuebased definitions, OSHA summed all
economic data for all employee-class
sizes under the largest employee-class
size where the average revenue per firm
was under the SBA-determined cut-off
revenue. Where available, SUSB data is
used to estimate firms, establishments,
and employees by size class. As
discussed in section VIII.B.II., there are
some NAICS industries that are
unavailable in the SUSB, so OSHA used
alternative data sources, as discussed in
section VIII.B.II.A., to estimate
employment and establishment counts
by size class in those instances.
For the private sector industries that
were missing from the SUSB dataset due
to data disclosure limitations, OSHA
estimated the percentage of employment
and establishments in each size class
category using SUSB data where
available for the sector and then applied
that to the total counts of employment
and establishments described in Section
VIII.B.II., Potentially Affected Industries
and Employees. OSHA used data from
the Census of Agriculture (USDA, 2019)
to estimate the industry characteristics
for NAICS industries within the
agriculture sector and QCEW data for
the remaining NAICS industries that
were missing size class information due
to data disclosure limitations.
Local government data were drawn
from the Census Bureau’s (2023) GUS
data for 2022 (BLS, 2023d). The data
include the 2021 population of each
city, county, and town served by the
listed local governments. Using the GUS
data, OSHA found that, of the 38,736
local governments listed, 18,028 are in
State Plan States and 16,893 of these
have a population of less than 50,000
and are, thus, considered small. No
State governments are considered small
under the RFA definition.
Based on the exemption for
emergency response activities, OSHA
estimated the number of fire
departments that serve small
governmental jurisdictions and the
number of firefighters that they employ.
To derive these estimates, OSHA
estimated the median population served
per fire department employee and used
that to estimate how many employees a
department would need to employ to
serve a population greater than 50,000.
OSHA used data from two Firehouse
Magazine surveys to determine the
median population served per employee
for career and mixed fire departments at
various employment size classes to
extrapolate to the entire universe of fire
departments. Part 1 of the 2021 National
Run Survey (Firehouse Magazine,
2022b) presents data from 229 career
fire departments’ statistics about
population and staffing. Similarly, the
2021 Combination Fire Department Run
Survey (Firehouse Magazine, 2022a) has
mixed fire department data. Estimates of
the median population served per
employee derived from both surveys are
multiplied by the number of employees
for each department in the U.S. Fire
Administration’s (USFA, 2022) registry
data (used for the Fire Department
profile (see Section VIII.B.II., Potentially
Affected Industries and Employees))
within each employee size class to
determine how many departments serve
populations of fewer than 50,000. These
estimated counts of employees and fire
departments corresponding to those
departments were removed from the
count of employees, entities, and
establishments at affected small
governments.
C. Summary of Small and Very Small
Entities
Table VIII.B.13. presents the number
of small firms and establishments and
the number of very small firms and
establishments, as well as the number of
employees estimated to work for these
small and very small entities. In some
industries with revenue-based SBA
thresholds for small entities, the counts
of small affected firms (establishments)
are less than the counts for very small
firms (establishments). This occurs
when some very small firms
(establishments) have revenue that
exceeds the small entity revenue
threshold and are therefore not included
in the counts of small firms
(establishments).
TABLE VIII.B.13—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY
CORE INDUSTRY AND REGION
Small (SBA/RFA)
Region
Very small (<20)
I Establishments I
Entities
Employees
I Establishments I
Entities
Employees
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
475
24,294
16,193
199
26,346
44 The RFA also includes small organizations
defined as any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. Traditionally, OSHA
considers all non-profit organizations to be small
entities based on this definition. This has the effect
of including some very large organizations in the
analysis of small entities (e.g., some major hospital
systems with tens of thousands of employees are
non-profit entities) thus skewing the costs and
impacts for the average small entity. For this
analysis, OSHA did not separately assess impacts
on non-profit entities. To the extent that non-profit
entities are similar in size to small for-profit entities
(either based on the number of employees or
revenues), the costs and impact estimates would be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
I
Frm 00124
478
24,322
16,208
199
26,377
Fmt 4701
I
Sfmt 4702
831
149,091
115,421
1,399
169,979
466
15,065
12,736
138
17,326
I
466
15,065
12,738
138
17,331
I
544
55,208
53,826
1,082
62,951
consistent. The costs of this proposed standard are
largely employee based and the agency has not
found there to be feasibility concerns for entities of
any size. Including large non-profits in the profile
of SBA/RFA defined small entities would not alter
the findings of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (See section VIII.F.).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70821
TABLE VIII.B.13—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY
CORE INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Western ................................................
16,211
16,268
314,889
10,009
10,012
58,338
Subtotal .........................................
83,717
83,853
751,608
55,739
55,750
231,950
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
14
1,192
1,999
38
1,814
1,509
15
1,282
2,128
41
1,946
1,596
216
25,975
40,838
679
34,426
28,722
27
2,192
3,358
52
2,855
2,311
27
2,231
3,409
52
2,898
2,345
202
18,113
27,914
395
23,385
18,858
Subtotal .........................................
6,566
7,009
130,856
10,795
10,962
88,866
Commercial Kitchens
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
509
36,119
65,298
1,282
42,239
38,954
579
40,201
69,963
1,388
47,058
43,511
4,603
472,283
724,441
16,812
571,817
487,920
430
26,822
51,676
946
31,027
29,838
432
26,939
51,830
949
31,159
30,051
1,745
130,727
233,251
4,411
145,802
149,486
Subtotal .........................................
184,402
202,700
2,277,876
140,740
141,361
665,422
Construction
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
2,383
158,425
230,158
3,308
163,896
151,930
2,400
158,752
230,528
3,317
164,295
152,258
6,784
562,118
840,221
15,761
695,987
602,318
2,277
147,997
214,268
2,986
149,782
140,362
2,279
148,028
214,313
2,986
149,827
140,392
4,532
315,449
467,181
8,179
359,212
322,939
Subtotal .........................................
710,101
711,550
2,723,189
657,671
657,825
1,477,491
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
17
1,929
5,626
39
3,087
2,352
19
2,171
5,994
41
3,449
2,501
95
8,814
17,624
313
12,989
8,319
16
1,754
5,330
32
2,843
2,214
17
1,797
5,438
34
2,951
2,268
69
4,391
10,761
83
7,977
5,138
Subtotal .........................................
13,051
14,174
48,155
12,190
12,506
28,419
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Landscaping and Facilities Support
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
105
11,364
18,330
223
12,805
9,634
109
11,974
19,096
250
13,271
9,974
1,938
165,112
270,325
5,027
200,425
152,217
98
10,565
17,103
202
11,867
8,953
99
10,796
17,308
203
11,974
9,030
860
82,930
131,677
2,067
101,006
77,219
Subtotal .........................................
52,461
54,673
795,043
48,789
49,410
395,758
Maintenance and Repair
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
174
19,068
25,688
304
20,023
15,931
186
19,653
26,211
318
20,552
16,477
1,055
108,461
144,821
1,926
117,782
100,556
174
19,174
25,704
304
20,239
16,000
176
19,344
25,857
306
20,395
16,166
821
84,101
113,180
1,384
87,092
72,908
Subtotal .........................................
81,188
83,397
474,600
81,595
82,245
359,487
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70822
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.13—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY
CORE INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
I Establishments
I Employees
Entities
I Establishments I Employees
Manufacturing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
161
28,332
33,582
282
24,499
24,347
180
29,454
34,481
288
25,279
24,818
1,703
617,095
611,009
2,422
450,901
337,592
141
20,447
25,312
248
18,822
19,945
147
20,529
25,388
248
18,884
19,989
430
95,353
112,950
818
83,417
76,876
Subtotal .........................................
111,203
114,500
2,020,722
84,915
85,185
369,844
Oil and Gas
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
53
2,861
1,391
0
10,562
1,561
61
3,003
1,458
0
11,375
1,631
692
15,645
9,518
0
87,027
9,034
29
2,423
1,116
0
8,658
1,306
29
2,443
1,125
0
8,691
1,308
70
4,948
2,497
0
17,744
2,807
Subtotal .........................................
16,428
17,527
121,915
13,532
13,596
28,065
Postal and Delivery Services
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
21
1,374
2,238
25
1,965
1,533
33
1,951
3,001
36
2,731
2,081
34
11,199
18,998
56
17,147
17,285
18
1,168
1,899
20
1,709
1,302
18
1,171
1,900
20
1,720
1,309
26
1,544
2,351
27
2,104
1,733
Subtotal .........................................
7,155
9,832
64,719
6,115
6,139
7,785
Recreation and Amusement
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
258
9,660
14,184
176
9,058
7,620
262
9,978
14,593
182
9,335
7,976
836
76,652
126,221
1,996
79,313
68,703
243
8,093
11,535
131
7,510
6,226
244
8,131
11,573
131
7,547
6,251
407
23,284
34,163
387
22,207
18,228
Subtotal .........................................
40,956
42,326
353,720
33,738
33,877
98,674
Sanitation and Waste Removal
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
17
598
908
13
579
403
17
613
925
16
600
416
260
11,803
21,423
510
13,810
10,566
16
519
763
10
481
333
16
519
765
10
482
334
144
5,716
8,892
186
5,650
4,111
Subtotal .........................................
2,517
2,586
58,372
2,120
2,125
24,699
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Telecommunications
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
0
6
11
0
14
14
0
6
12
0
16
14
0
28
108
0
124
71
4
281
370
2
341
271
4
303
388
3
361
286
18
1,237
1,356
13
1,341
1,089
Subtotal .........................................
46
48
332
1,269
1,344
5,054
111
58,271
2
487
2
490
24
4,506
Temporary Help Services
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
3
746
PO 00000
Frm 00126
3
785
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70823
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.B.13—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY
CORE INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
1,258
9
1,001
734
1,305
10
1,064
765
92,651
1,444
81,872
47,601
845
5
663
520
847
5
666
525
7,409
43
5,193
3,995
Subtotal .........................................
3,752
3,933
281,950
2,522
2,537
21,170
Transportation
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
472
35,362
30,938
336
30,063
22,303
551
35,967
31,687
378
31,185
23,056
2,648
100,567
109,558
3,401
121,185
77,739
402
32,172
27,247
248
26,656
19,941
407
32,196
27,290
252
26,726
20,008
779
40,920
38,381
513
38,318
26,654
Subtotal .........................................
119,474
122,823
415,098
106,667
106,879
145,566
Utilities
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
56
1,169
1,235
12
2,393
1,279
86
2,078
2,285
25
3,494
1,717
742
18,326
22,667
105
28,343
11,810
34
711
835
9
1,911
1,067
37
760
957
9
1,960
1,103
110
2,076
2,177
28
4,049
3,123
Subtotal .........................................
6,144
9,686
81,995
4,568
4,826
11,564
Warehousing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
21
2,193
2,820
42
2,570
2,035
22
3,078
3,920
51
3,800
2,888
126
70,279
105,756
449
87,420
67,352
10
732
1,034
8
965
806
10
753
1,051
8
975
820
17
1,639
2,412
34
2,066
1,817
Subtotal .........................................
9,681
13,759
331,382
3,555
3,618
7,985
Non-Core
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
1,503
109,785
175,885
2,738
133,234
113,249
1,582
114,774
181,593
2,857
138,262
117,242
14,497
1,251,037
1,867,095
22,687
1,099,714
1,000,087
1,594
117,012
189,755
2,818
147,342
122,703
1,620
117,910
190,941
2,851
148,376
123,582
5,729
428,271
648,153
9,578
508,465
423,075
Subtotal .........................................
536,394
556,310
5,255,118
581,225
585,280
2,023,270
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
6,241
444,478
627,742
9,027
486,148
411,599
6,582
460,042
645,388
9,397
504,089
425,189
37,172
3,722,756
5,138,694
74,988
3,870,261
3,342,781
5,982
407,614
590,884
8,161
450,999
384,105
6,031
409,405
593,119
8,205
452,925
385,778
16,526
1,300,411
1,898,531
29,227
1,477,979
1,268,393
Total ..............................................
1,985,235
2,050,685
16,186,651
1,847,745
1,855,463
5,991,068
Source: OSHA, based on BLS, 2023; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023b; Census Bureau, 2023d; Firehouse Magazine, 2022a; Firehouse Magazine 2022b; SBA 2023; USDA, 2019; USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70824
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
C. Costs of Compliance
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Introduction
This section presents OSHA’s
preliminary analysis of the compliance
costs associated with the proposed
standard for Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work
Settings.
OSHA estimates that the proposed
standard would cost annually $7.8
billion (in 2023 dollars) at a discount
rate of 2 percent. On average, the
annualized cost per establishment is
estimated to be $3,085.45 All costs were
annualized using a discount rate of 2
percent, consistent with OMB Circular
A–4 (OMB, 2023).46 A 10-year period is
used to annualize one-time costs or
other costs that do not occur every year.
Note that the benefits of the proposed
standard, discussed in Section VIII.E.,
Benefits, are also annualized over a 10year period. Therefore, the time horizon
of OSHA’s complete analysis of this
proposed standard is 10 years.
Employment and production in affected
sectors are implicitly held constant over
this time horizon for purposes of the
analysis.
While some employers may be able to
make fixed investments to reduce their
marginal per-employee costs (e.g., onsite freezers, air conditioning) as a result
of the proposed standard, for the
purposes of this cost analysis OSHA
assumes that employers do not make
these adjustments. This assumption may
result in an overestimate of the costs of
compliance (e.g., for some firms it may
be less costly to install air conditioning
rather than increasing rest break time for
employees). The agency also did not
explore all potential societal costs (i.e.,
those that do not affect the proposed
standard’s economic feasibility). OSHA
welcomes comment on other impacts
the rule may have on employees that the
agency has not considered in this
preliminary analysis but should
consider in the final analysis.
The remainder of this section is
organized as follows: first, OSHA
discusses cost assumptions used in the
analysis, followed by the derivation of
45 Spreadsheet detailing all calculations
discussed in this analysis are available in
Analytical Support for OSHA’s Preliminary
Economic Analysis for the Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention (OSHA, 2024c).
46 Section VIII.C.V., Total Costs, presents total
annualized costs, discounted (2 percent over a 10year period) and undiscounted.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the wage rates used to estimate labor
costs. Next, OSHA presents unit and
total costs by affected industry sector
and region and by applicable provision
of the proposed standard. The final
section presents the total costs of the
proposed standard for all affected
entities and employees as well as those
that meet the SBA/RFA definitions of
small entities and those with fewer than
20 employees. Discussion of burden
reducing regulatory alternatives and
regulatory options that may increase
costs of compliance are discussed in
Section VIII.F.II.G., Alternatives and
Regulatory Options to the Proposed
Rule.
II. Cost Assumptions
This section describes the cost
assumptions used in this analysis
including those relevant to baseline
conditions, temperature, and heatrelated incidence rates. OSHA
welcomes comment on all assumptions
and estimates discussed in this section.
Additional data or suggestions on
methodological changes the agency
should consider are also welcome.
A. Baseline Non-Compliance Rates
The estimated costs of the proposed
standard are measured against the
baseline activities of the affected
industries, including core and non-core
industries (see Section VIII.B., Profile of
Affected Industries for a discussion and
definition of core industries). The
baseline for this analysis includes
existing conformity (‘‘compliance’’)
with the provisions of the proposed
standard. Compliance costs are
estimated only for ‘‘non-compliant’’
entities with practices that currently do
not conform to the proposed standard
and who would therefore incur costs to
comply with it.
OSHA developed baseline noncompliance rates (percent of noncompliant entities) based on a review of
existing State requirements (e.g., State
heat standards, non-heat-specific paid
rest break State laws 47), State-level
workforce characteristics (e.g.,
prevalence of piece-rate pay, collective
bargaining), and other industry practices
when employees are exposed to heatrelated hazards in the workplace,
datasets and reports detailing current
47 In most cases, Federal law does not require the
provision of rest breaks, see https://www.dol.gov/
general/topic/workhours/breaks.
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
practices within specific industries,
feedback from participants in the Small
Business Advocacy Review (SBAR)
Panel, and professional expertise of
OSHA staff. OSHA prioritized the use of
State-specific data sources wherever
possible; however, in the absence of
State-specific data, national data sources
were used to develop baseline noncompliance rates. In some instances, no
data were available to develop baseline
non-compliance rates for certain
provisions within certain industries. In
these cases, OSHA assumed default
non-compliance rates for those
industries, in some cases distinguishing
between core and non-core industries
(see section VIII.B.II.A. for more
information on core industries). For
certain provisions (i.e., heat hazard
evaluation and acclimatization), OSHA
believes that non-compliance rates
among core industries may be lower
than those within non-core industries
(i.e., employers in core industries are
doing more of what OSHA would
require under this proposed standard)
because core industries have more
affected employees, and more heatrelated hazards present in their work
processes. For this reason, core
industries may be more likely to have
policies and procedures in place to
protect employees from heat-related
hazards on their work sites than
employers in non-core industries who
may be less aware of heat hazards
present in their workplace. However, for
other provisions (e.g., providing
drinking water and rest break policies)
current employment practices are
affected by factors beyond heat;
therefore, OSHA assumes default noncompliance rates for all industries,
assuming they are the same for core and
non-core industries.
Some States already have heat
standards that address some or all
settings in the State. While the agency
estimates that all covered employers
would incur some costs to comply with
this proposed standard, employers in
States that have heat standards will
likely have lower compliance costs
since they are already doing some of
what would be required by OSHA. This
is reflected in this analysis. Table
VIII.C.1. shows the States with existing
State heat standards and the
corresponding industries and work
settings within the scope of those State
standards.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70825
TABLE VIII.C.1—STATES AND INDUSTRIES WITH EXISTING STATE HEAT STANDARDS
Sector
State
Source
Outdoor Settings—NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112,
561730 a.
Indoor and Outdoor Settings—NAICS11 ..............................
Indoor Settings—All Sectors .................................................
Indoor and Outdoor Settings—All sectors ............................
California .....................
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .....................
Minnesota ...................
Oregon ........................
Outdoor Settings—All Sectors ..............................................
Washington .................
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin. R. 437–
004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through 296–
62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–307–09760
(2023).
a California’s standard only covers outdoor workers within select industries within sector 11. Covered agricultural sectors include 1111, 1112,
1113, 1114, 1119, 1121, 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1129, 1151, and 1152.
Since all affected establishments
would need to incur some cost to
develop a HIIPP that meets OSHA’s
requirements, OSHA assumes that even
establishments with existing HIIPPs in
place would incur costs to review and
modify their HIIPP to meet OSHA’s
requirements. Table VIII.C.2. shows the
percentages of establishments estimated
to have existing HIIPPs in place in
certain industries and States.
TABLE VIII.C.2—PERCENTAGE OF ESTABLISHMENTS WITH EXISTING HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLANS
Percent of
establishments
Sector
State
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841, 4842,
4884, 4889, 561730 a.
Sector 11 ...................................................................
All Sectors .................................................................
All Sectors .................................................................
California ................
b 100.0
Colorado .................
Minnesota ...............
Oregon ...................
100.0
100.0
100.0
All Sectors .................................................................
Washington ............
100.0
Sectors 23 and 31–33 ...............................................
Core Industries ..........................................................
Non-Core Industries ..................................................
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
75.0
50.0
10.0
Source
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through
296–62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023).
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
a California’s standard only covers select industries within sector 11. Covered agricultural sectors include 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1119, 1121,
1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1129, 1151, and 1152.
b California’s standard specifies that 6-digit NAICS industries 213111, 213112, and 561730 need to follow the requirements of that rule. Since
OSHA analyzes costs and economic impacts for this proposed standard at the 4-digit NAICS level, OSHA assumes that only a subset of NAICS
2131 and 5617 in California are already compliant with the requirements of OSHA’s proposed standard. For NAICS 2131, OSHA assumes that
40 percent of NAICS 2131 are already compliant (since 213111 and 213112 represent two of the five 6-digit NAICS within the 4-digit NAICS
2131). For NAICS 5617, OSHA assumes that 20 percent of NAICS 5617 are already compliant (since 561730 represents one of the five 6-digit
NAICS within the 4-digit NAICS 5617).
Table VIII.C.3. shows the estimated
baseline non-compliance rates for rest
breaks at both the initial and high heat
triggers by State. OSHA estimated Statelevel non-compliance rates for rest
breaks at the initial and high heat
triggers based on a review of existing
State requirements (State heat
standards, non-heat-specific paid rest
break State laws), State-level workforce
characteristics (prevalence of piece-rate
pay, collective bargaining), and existing
paid rest breaks in collective bargaining
agreements (Justia, 2022; DOL, 2023a;
DOL, 2023b; NCFH, 2022; Gittleman
and Pierce, 2013; Adams et al. 2009;
Hirsch et al., n.d.; DOL, 2024b).
For each State, the State-level noncompliance rate for initial heat trigger
rest breaks is assumed to be equal to the
percentage of non-union piece-rate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
workers in that State.48 Based on review
of existing collective bargaining
agreements, feedback from Small Entity
Representatives during the SBAR Panel
process reporting high current
compliance with if-needed rest breaks
(which is also consistent with worker
surveys such as Mirabelli et al. (2010)
and Langer et al. (2021) reporting high
current compliance with if-needed rest
breaks), and evidence that piece-rate
workers are incentivized to work faster
and take fewer rest breaks than nonpiece-rate workers as reported in focus
group discussions with U.S.
farmworkers (Wadsworth et al., 2019;
Lam et al., 2013), OSHA assumes that,
nationwide, all non-piece-rate workers
and workers affiliated with a union
(both piece-rate and non-piece-rate) are
48 Detailed formulas are available in
Noncompliance Rates for Rest Breaks (OSHA,
2024e).
PO 00000
Frm 00129
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
already allowed rest breaks if needed
from their employer.
State-level non-compliance rates for
high heat trigger rest breaks were
calculated based on the State or
territory’s current paid rest break laws,
State heat standards, prevalence of rest
breaks in collective bargaining
agreements, and the share of employees
affiliated with a union (by membership
or representation).49 The rationale
49 Detailed formulas are available in
Noncompliance Rates for Rest Breaks (OSHA,
2024e). In estimating unit costs of compliance with
the high heat trigger breaks, OSHA estimates that
employers that are fully noncompliant in outdoor
and indoor settings will incur 47 minutes and 41
minutes per employee, respectively. However, in
the State-level baseline compliance calculations
OSHA assumes that employers (indoor and
outdoor) that offer 47 minutes of break plus travel
time are 100 percent compliant with the high heat
trigger breaks. This simplifying assumption results
in an underestimate of baseline compliance for
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
Continued
30AUP2
70826
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
behind the formulas is as follows. Nonunion piece-rate employees in any State
are likely the least protected, currently
assumed to be taking zero breaks at the
high heat trigger.50 Non-union nonpiece-rate employees are likely most
protected in States with a heat standard
(i.e., these employees are getting most
required scheduled rest breaks in
addition to if-needed rest breaks), less
protected in States with some non-heatrelated paid break law (these workers
are getting some scheduled rest breaks),
and the least protected in States with no
paid break law (these employees may be
getting no scheduled rest breaks). Also,
in any State, OSHA assumes that
employees (both piece-rate and non-
piece-rate) affiliated with a union are
more protected than non-union
employees by being provided some
scheduled as well as if-needed rest
breaks. Collective bargaining agreements
differ across employers and States;
however, collective bargaining
agreements are likely more protective
(meaning employees covered by a union
are likely to get more scheduled rest
breaks) in States with a heat standard or
non-heat-related paid break law than in
States with no paid break law.
OSHA acknowledges that there is
limited information on current baseline
non-compliance rates for rest breaks in
(1) States without existing rest breaks
laws and (2) States with existing rest
break laws. OSHA welcomes feedback
on the assumptions and estimates of rest
break non-compliance by State (and
territory) described above. OSHA is
soliciting feedback on whether the
assumptions regarding compliance
differences by workforce characteristics
(e.g., piece rate workers, union work,
State break laws, State heat laws) are
reasonable or if there are alternative
methods, sources of data, or
assumptions that should be considered.
OSHA is especially interested in
existing research or data sources that
can be used to evaluate the impact of
rest breaks in States with existing
requirements.
TABLE VIII.C.3—REST BREAK NON-COMPLIANCE RATES BY STATE AND TERRITORY
Initial heat trigger
(%)
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
State
Alabama ...........................................................................................................................................
Alaska ..............................................................................................................................................
American Samoa b ...........................................................................................................................
Arkansas ..........................................................................................................................................
Arizona .............................................................................................................................................
California ..........................................................................................................................................
Colorado ..........................................................................................................................................
Connecticut ......................................................................................................................................
District of Columbia .........................................................................................................................
Delaware ..........................................................................................................................................
Florida ..............................................................................................................................................
Georgia ............................................................................................................................................
Guam b .............................................................................................................................................
Hawaii ..............................................................................................................................................
Idaho ................................................................................................................................................
Illinois ...............................................................................................................................................
Indiana .............................................................................................................................................
Iowa .................................................................................................................................................
Kansas .............................................................................................................................................
Kentucky ..........................................................................................................................................
Louisiana ..........................................................................................................................................
Maine ...............................................................................................................................................
Maryland ..........................................................................................................................................
Massachusetts .................................................................................................................................
Michigan ...........................................................................................................................................
Minnesota ........................................................................................................................................
Mississippi ........................................................................................................................................
Missouri ............................................................................................................................................
Montana ...........................................................................................................................................
Nebraska ..........................................................................................................................................
Nevada .............................................................................................................................................
New Hampshire ...............................................................................................................................
New Jersey ......................................................................................................................................
New Mexico .....................................................................................................................................
New York .........................................................................................................................................
North Carolina ..................................................................................................................................
North Dakota ....................................................................................................................................
Northern Mariana Islands b ..............................................................................................................
Ohio .................................................................................................................................................
Oklahoma .........................................................................................................................................
Oregon .............................................................................................................................................
Pennsylvania ....................................................................................................................................
Puerto Rico b ....................................................................................................................................
Rhode Island ....................................................................................................................................
South Carolina .................................................................................................................................
South Dakota ...................................................................................................................................
indoor employers—employers with indoor workers
that are technically currently 100 percent compliant
by already providing 41 minutes of break time
(including travel time) are calculated as being 87
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
percent compliant (41 minutes provided/47
minutes), instead of 100 percent (fully compliant).
50 This assumption may overestimate noncompliance of employers of piece-rate workers in
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
6.3
6.0
6.2
6.4
6.6
5.7
6.3
6.0
6.3
6.3
6.6
6.6
6.2
4.8
6.6
5.8
6.1
6.3
6.0
6.0
6.6
6.4
6.2
5.9
5.6
5.9
6.0
5.9
6.0
6.4
5.6
6.4
5.5
6.4
5.2
6.7
6.4
6.2
6.0
6.6
5.9
5.8
6.2
5.9
6.7
6.7
High heat trigger
(%)
67.7
a 65.7
67.1
68.3
70.0
13.7
15.3
65.9
67.9
67.9
69.7
69.5
67.1
58.4
69.5
28.4
66.3
67.6
66.2
29.0
69.6
68.2
29.8
65.6
63.2
28.6
66.2
65.5
66.0
68.4
27.4
68.4
62.9
68.7
61.1
70.4
68.3
67.1
65.6
69.6
5.9
64.9
67.1
65.0
70.6
70.5
states that have laws requiring paid rest breaks for
piece-rate workers (in all sectors for California, in
the agricultural sector for Washington State).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70827
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.3—REST BREAK NON-COMPLIANCE RATES BY STATE AND TERRITORY—Continued
Initial heat trigger
(%)
State
Tennessee .......................................................................................................................................
Texas ...............................................................................................................................................
Utah .................................................................................................................................................
U.S. Virgin Islands b .........................................................................................................................
Vermont ...........................................................................................................................................
Virginia .............................................................................................................................................
Washington ......................................................................................................................................
West Virginia ....................................................................................................................................
Wisconsin .........................................................................................................................................
Wyoming ..........................................................................................................................................
High heat trigger
(%)
6.4
6.6
6.5
6.2
5.8
6.6
5.5
6.0
6.2
6.6
68.6
69.7
68.8
67.1
64.9
69.9
13.3
66.0
67.1
69.5
a The weather data (discussed in Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected Industries) do not show Alaska meeting or exceeding the high heat trigger.
However, OSHA applied the same assumptions used for other States to arrive at a non-compliance rate for Alaska that would be applied if there
were exposure to heat at or above the high heat trigger. In the current analysis, the cost for high heat trigger rest breaks is zero for employers in
Alaska. In the event that the estimation methodology for exposure to heat used in the final analysis is changed in a manner that results in employees in Alaska being found to be exposed to heat at or above the high heat trigger, this non-compliance rate will be applied in those situations.
b Rest break non-compliance rates for U.S. territories were imputed using the employment-weighted average of the non-compliance rates of
the States without any paid break law.
Source: OSHA estimates based on Justia, 2022; DOL, 2023a; DOL, 2023b; NCFH, 2022; Gittleman and Pierce, 2013; Adams et al. 2009;
Hirsch et al., n.d.; DOL, 2024b; formulas in OSHA, 2024e.
Table VIII.C.4. shows the estimated
baseline non-compliance rates for all
other requirements of the proposed
standard. Within certain provisions,
OSHA outlines different noncompliance rates for certain
requirements under each provision (e.g.,
OSHA found that some State rules
require initial training on heat-related
hazards for employees but do not
require refresher training).
OSHA welcomes feedback on the
baseline non-compliance estimates that
are detailed in table VIII.C.4. OSHA
seeks information and feedback on the
following topics: alternative sources;
existing employer practices in States
with or without existing heat
regulations; variation in noncompliance based on employer size,
industry, and occupation; and the
assumption that non-core industries
tend to have lower baseline compliance
(and higher non-compliance) than core
industries.
TABLE VIII.C.4—NON-COMPLIANCE RATES BY PROVISION
Industry/sector
State
Non-compliance
estimate
(%)
Source
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Plan
Develop or Modify HIIPP:
All Sectors a ......................................................
Review HIIPP:
All Sectors ........................................................
Employee Involvement:
All Sectors ........................................................
National ..................
100.0
OSHA estimate.
National ..................
50.0
OSHA estimate.
National ..................
75.0
OSHA estimate.
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .................
Minnesota ...............
Oregon ...................
0.0
0.0
0.0
All Sectors ........................................................
Washington ............
0.0
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Industries ..........................................
Environmental Monitoring—Indoor:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sector 11 ..........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
National ..................
National ..................
16.7
20.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through
296–62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .................
Minnesota ...............
Oregon ...................
0.0
0.0
0.0
Washington ............
0.0
Identifying Heat Hazards
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Environmental Monitoring—Outdoor:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sector 11 ..........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through
296–62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70828
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.4—NON-COMPLIANCE RATES BY PROVISION—Continued
Non-compliance
estimate
(%)
Industry/sector
State
Source
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Hazard Evaluation:
NAICS 2211 .....................................................
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Employee Involvement:
All sectors ................................................................
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
16.7
50.0
90.0
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
National
National
National
National
..................
..................
..................
..................
28.3
7.7
50.0
90.0
Kaltsatou et al., 2021.
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
National ..................
75.0
OSHA Estimate.
Requirements at or Above the Initial Heat Trigger
Drinking Water:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sector 23 ..........................................................
Sector 11 d .......................................................
All Other Industries ..........................................
Break Area(s) at Outdoor Work Sites:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Indoor Work Area and Break Area Controls:
All Sectors ........................................................
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Acclimatization—New Employees:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
NAICS 2111 .....................................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Acclimatization—Returning Employees:
Sector 11 ..........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
Effective Communication—Supervisor e:
All sectors ........................................................
Effective Communication—Employee e:
All sectors ................................................................
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Texas .....................
National ..................
National ..................
59.0
3.0
10.0
Workers Defense Project, 2013.
DOL, 2022.
OSHA Estimate.
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
20.0
50.0
90.0
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Oregon ...................
0.0
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
50.0
50.0
90.0
California ................
c0
National
National
National
National
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
..................
..................
..................
..................
44.8
72.0
50.0
90.0
OSHA, 2023.
Ergodyne, 2020.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Colorado .................
Oregon ...................
0.0
0.0
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
67.2
50.0
90.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
National ..................
25.0
OSHA Estimate.
National ..................
50.0
OSHA Estimate.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Requirements at or Above the High Heat Trigger
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—Supervisor:
All Sectors ........................................................
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—Employee:
All Sectors ........................................................
Hazard Alert:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sector 11 ..........................................................
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
National ..................
25.0
OSHA Estimate.
National ..................
50.0
OSHA Estimate.
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .................
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
0.0
9.1
50.0
90.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b
Sector 11 .................................................................
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .............................................
All Other Core Industries ........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .................
National ..................
National ..................
50.0
16.7
50.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
Frm 00132
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70829
TABLE VIII.C.4—NON-COMPLIANCE RATES BY PROVISION—Continued
Non-compliance
estimate
(%)
Industry/sector
State
All Other Non-Core Industries .................................
National ..................
Source
90.0
OSHA Estimate.
California ................
c 0.0
Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005).
Colorado .................
Minnesota ...............
Oregon ...................
0.0
0.0
0.0
All Sectors ........................................................
Washington ............
0.0
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
NAICS 2211 .....................................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .........................
National
National
National
National
Training
Initial Training:
NAICS 11, 23, 2111, 213111, 213112, 4841,
4842, 4884, 4889, 561730 b.
Sector 11 ..........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
..................
..................
..................
..................
20.0
26.1
50.0
90.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through
296–62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023).
OSHA, 2023.
Kaltsatou et al., 2021.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Refresher Training
Sector 11 .................................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
All Sectors ........................................................
Colorado .................
Minnesota ...............
Oregon ...................
0.0
0.0
0.0
All Sectors ........................................................
Washington ............
0.0
Sectors 23 and 31–33 .....................................
All Other Core Industries .................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .................................
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
0.0
50.0
90.0
7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103–15 (2022).
Minn. R. 5205.0110 (1997).
Or. Admin. R. 437–002–0156 (2022); Or. Admin.
R. 437–004–1131 (2022).
Wash. Admin. Code sections 296–62–095 through
296–62–09560; 296–307–097 through 296–
307–09760 (2023).
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
64.3
50.0
90.0
OSHA, 2023.
OSHA Estimate.
OSHA Estimate.
Recordkeeping
Sectors 23 and 31–33
All Other Core Industries ........................................
All Other Non-Core Industries .................................
National ..................
National ..................
National ..................
a OSHA assumes that all employers will need to develop a HIIPP, either by creating a new HIIPP or reviewing and updating an existing HIIPP
to comply with the proposed standard. More discussion of the calculation of HIIPP total costs can be found in section VIII.C.V.B.
b The California State rule only covers select industries within sector 11. Covered agricultural sectors include NAICS 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114,
1119, 1121, 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1129, 1151, and 1152.
c California’s standard specifies that 6-digit NAICS 213111, 213112, and 561730 need to follow the requirements of that rule. Since OSHA analyzes costs and economic impacts for this proposed standard at the 4-digit NAICS level, OSHA assumes that only a subset of NAICS 2131 and
5617 in California are already compliant with the requirements of OSHA’s proposed standard. For NAICS 2131, OSHA assumes that 40 percent
of NAICS 2131 are already compliant (since NAICS 213111 and 213112 represent two of the five 6-digit NAICS within the 4-digit NAICS 2131).
For NAICS 5617, OSHA assumes that 20 percent of NAICS 5617 are already compliant (since NAICS 561730 represents one of the five 6-digit
NAICS industries within the 4-digit NAICS 5617). Using these assumptions, 60 percent of NAICS 2131 and 80 percent of NAICS 5617 are considered non-compliant.
d Only covers NAICS industry groups 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1119, 1121, 1122, 1123, 1151, and 1152 within sector 11.
e Compliance with the effective communication provision of the proposed standard requires employers to maintain two-way communication with
employees and to regularly communicate with employees. For the purposes of this cost analysis, OSHA assumes that 50 percent of employers
are currently compliant with the provision. OSHA also assumes that half of the remaining non-compliant employers currently engage in one-way
communication (from supervisor to employee) and would only incur costs for the employee’s time communicating with or responding to the supervisor, which is reflected in the different non-compliance estimates (for employer and supervisor) for effective communication.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Cost Savings
OSHA also considers potential cost
savings from the proposed standard as
a result of requiring employers to
provide employees if-needed or
scheduled rest breaks (see appendix A
at the end of this section for additional
details on the assumptions and
estimates discussed in this section). The
best available evidence indicates that
when employees are exposed to heat
and are not allowed to take rest breaks
or adjust their work hours, they must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
pace themselves (i.e., work more slowly)
to counteract the effects of heat
exposure. OSHA has preliminarily
determined that when employees are
offered rest breaks, cost savings will
accrue to employers who are currently
noncompliant with the rest break
requirements because their employees
will work more efficiently (i.e., pace
themselves less) during work time not
spent on rest breaks. For the purposes
of this analysis, OSHA assumes that
when calculating the unit cost of rest
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
break requirements, these accrued cost
savings partially offset the wage cost of
the employee’s time spent in required
rest breaks.
OSHA has estimated how many
minutes of work time are lost due to
employees pacing themselves when the
heat index is equal to the initial and
high heat triggers.51 OSHA bases these
51 The extent of labor productivity loss due to
pacing is evaluated when the heat index is equal
to the initial or high heat triggers. However, the
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
Continued
30AUP2
70830
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
estimates on empirical studies and
assumed that the employees in these
studies represent a nationwide average
employee (for any State, industry, type
of worksite, etc.). Some studies included
employees who took no rest breaks.
Some studies included employees who
took only if-needed rest breaks but not
scheduled rest breaks, and others
included employees who took both ifneeded and scheduled rest breaks.
OSHA found that there was a decrease
in pacing among employees who took ifneeded rest breaks and a greater
decrease in pacing among those who
took scheduled rest breaks as well as ifneeded rest breaks, as compared with
employees who took no rest breaks.
Reductions in pacing at the initial heat
trigger from adding if-needed rest breaks
and reductions in pacing at the high
heat trigger from adding scheduled rest
breaks are translated into equivalent
minutes of work time saved as a share
of the full unit time-cost of these rest
breaks, which are then monetized to
derive total labor costs saved for
employers.
C. Temperature
Some of the requirements of the
proposed standard would only be
required when the heat index meets or
exceeds a certain heat trigger (i.e., the
initial heat trigger at 80 °F or the high
heat trigger at 90 °F). Requirements
dependent on the heat index meeting or
exceeding certain triggers include,
among other things:
• Rest breaks (at both the initial and
high heat triggers),
• Acclimatization (at the initial heat
trigger),
• Effective communication (initial
heat trigger),
• Observation for signs and
symptoms (high heat trigger), and
• Hazard Alert (high heat trigger).
In order to calculate the number of
times these costs would be incurred by
entities on a state-by-state basis, OSHA
used heat index data from the NOAA
Local Climatological Data (LCD) for
2020 through 2022 (NOAA, 2023b). The
LCD data included heat index
measurements on an hourly basis for
NWS stations across the country. Due to
limited data availability, OSHA
reviewed a subset of 245 weather
stations, ultimately analyzing 238
stations for the calculation. For each
station, OSHA determined the number
of workday 52 hours that met or
exceeded each of the heat triggers
within each shift type as outlined in
Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected
Industries. From here, OSHA took the
average of the number of workday hours
meeting or exceeding each of the heat
triggers across stations in each State.53
OSHA excluded seven of the 245
stations for which 10 percent or more of
all heat index measurements across all
three years of data analyzed were
missing.54 OSHA also evaluated the
temperature data to identify States with
relatively low levels of humidity 55
(Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and
Utah) to inform costs related to
dehumidification. OSHA used outdoor
weather data as a proxy for high heat
conditions in indoor settings without
adequate climate control. Logically,
where a building does not have air
conditioning, there is a correlation
between the temperature indoors and
the temperature outdoors. This may
overstate or understate the effects of
outdoor temperature on indoor
temperatures. A well-insulated building
without air conditioning may be cooler
than the outside environment, but a
poorly insulated, poorly ventilated
building that absorbs considerable
direct sunlight may be hotter. Even
though exposure to process heat may be
exacerbated by outdoor temperatures
(e.g., on a hot day existing climate
control may be inadequate in a hot
kitchen), there may be instances where
exposure to process heat occurs on
relatively cool days. The agency lacks
data to make a finer estimate than using
outdoor weather as a proxy for indoor
heat conditions but welcomes data and
suggestions for improved estimation
methodology. The results of this
analysis are presented in table VIII.C.5.
TABLE VIII.C.5—AVERAGE ANNUAL HOURS EXCEEDING HEAT TRIGGERS BY STATE AND WORK SHIFT
Daytime shift
State
Initial heat
trigger
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Alaska ........................................................................................
Alabama ....................................................................................
American Samoa a ....................................................................
Arkansas ...................................................................................
Arizona ......................................................................................
California ...................................................................................
Colorado ....................................................................................
Connecticut ...............................................................................
District of Columbia b .................................................................
Delaware ...................................................................................
Florida .......................................................................................
Georgia ......................................................................................
Guam a ......................................................................................
Hawaii ........................................................................................
Iowa ...........................................................................................
Idaho .........................................................................................
Illinois ........................................................................................
Indiana .......................................................................................
Kansas ......................................................................................
annual number of work hours used in the
calculation of total labor cost savings from the
required rest breaks capture work hours when the
heat index is at or above the triggers (see discussion
of temperature data in the following section
VIII.C.II.C.). That is, in the calculation of the total
labor cost savings, for example, a worker exposed
to 95 °F heat index is assumed to lose the same
amount of labor productivity as a worker exposed
to 90 °F heat index (the high heat trigger). This
discrepancy and other simplifying assumptions
would result in potential misestimate of labor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
2
766
1,481
674
701
452
401
312
535
457
1,259
740
1,481
1,481
389
347
446
413
565
Evening shift
High heat
trigger
Initial heat
trigger
0
372
231
376
321
158
61
87
236
182
669
339
231
231
119
86
123
113
242
productivity losses from pacing and therefore
potential misestimate of total labor cost savings, as
discussed in more detail in appendix A.
52 Workday hours in the LCD data are defined as
hours on weekdays Monday through Friday for each
shift type.
53 OSHA acknowledges that this may be
imprecise in states where the climate varies widely
between different parts of the state. However, the
agency lacks data that would allow for employers
and employees to be more precisely located within
a given state. OSHA welcomes comment on this
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Overnight Shift
High heat
trigger
2
347
576
498
536
256
155
152
278
245
781
393
576
576
214
237
205
214
334
0
93
11
218
233
75
15
22
75
55
273
115
11
11
51
49
44
43
108
Initial heat
trigger
0
101
168
145
239
41
8
22
68
54
440
49
168
168
24
15
36
28
57
High heat
trigger
0
15
0
15
55
0
0
0
2
3
103
1
0
0
1
0
2
2
1
issue and suggestions for methodologies to more
precisely represent employee exposure within
States.
54 Based on this methodology, seven stations were
excluded: McGrath, AK; St. Paul Island, AK; North
Little Rock, AR; Eureka, CA; Marquette, MI;
Minneapolis, MN; and Mt. Washington, NH.
55 OSHA acknowledges that due to intrastate
variation in climatic conditions, this method may
underestimate the number of geographic areas that
have relatively low humidity.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70831
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.5—AVERAGE ANNUAL HOURS EXCEEDING HEAT TRIGGERS BY STATE AND WORK SHIFT—Continued
Daytime shift
State
Initial heat
trigger
Kentucky ....................................................................................
Louisiana ...................................................................................
Massachusetts ..........................................................................
Maryland ....................................................................................
Maine .........................................................................................
Michigan ....................................................................................
Minnesota ..................................................................................
Missouri .....................................................................................
Mississippi .................................................................................
Montana ....................................................................................
North Carolina ...........................................................................
North Dakota .............................................................................
Nebraska ...................................................................................
New Hampshire .........................................................................
New Jersey ...............................................................................
New Mexico ...............................................................................
Nevada ......................................................................................
New York ...................................................................................
Northern Mariana Islands a .......................................................
Ohio ...........................................................................................
Oklahoma ..................................................................................
Oregon ......................................................................................
Pennsylvania .............................................................................
Puerto Rico ...............................................................................
Rhode Island .............................................................................
South Carolina ..........................................................................
South Dakota ............................................................................
Tennessee .................................................................................
Texas .........................................................................................
Utah ...........................................................................................
U.S. Virgin Islands c ..................................................................
Virginia ......................................................................................
Vermont .....................................................................................
Washington ...............................................................................
Wisconsin ..................................................................................
West Virginia .............................................................................
Wyoming ...................................................................................
474
925
225
539
150
243
186
546
789
250
566
270
482
248
451
579
557
256
1,481
357
643
245
342
1,942
304
687
377
571
908
489
1,942
532
229
170
310
318
323
Evening shift
High heat
trigger
Initial heat
trigger
158
516
61
243
30
35
29
214
420
39
222
55
169
68
176
125
189
48
231
73
334
56
87
1,115
108
301
96
214
498
136
1,115
230
46
36
68
58
28
Overnight Shift
High heat
trigger
272
585
96
286
42
120
78
325
389
141
297
163
286
93
243
304
328
106
576
179
456
141
184
1,604
118
361
203
334
676
368
1,604
270
115
94
145
143
110
67
220
15
77
4
13
10
98
132
17
72
29
79
13
60
41
99
9
11
26
182
28
31
502
23
92
44
88
277
71
502
74
12
16
26
23
5
Initial heat
trigger
42
310
22
68
6
6
5
75
107
2
51
7
30
8
66
33
130
17
168
12
132
4
23
1,104
23
73
18
63
279
55
1,104
67
15
5
22
4
3
High heat
trigger
4
61
1
0
0
0
0
7
15
0
4
0
1
0
5
0
14
1
0
0
10
0
1
126
1
3
0
7
38
0
126
4
0
0
1
0
0
Source: NOAA, 2023b.
a The NOAA data OSHA used did not have data available for American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Estimates for these island areas are set
equal to Hawaii’s estimates.
b The NOAA data OSHA used did not have data available for the District of Columbia. These estimates reflect the midpoint between Maryland and Virginia’s estimates presented in this table.
c The NOAA data OSHA used did not have data available for the U.S. Virgin Islands. Estimates for the USVI are set equal to Puerto Rico’s estimates given their
relative proximity.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Heat-Related Illnesses—Counts and
Incidence Rates
The provisions of the proposed
standard addressing Heat Illness and
Emergency Response and Planning
would require establishments to
develop and implement a plan to treat
employees experiencing heat-related
illnesses, including heat emergencies.
The proposed standard requires
additional actions for employers when
the heat-related illness is considered a
heat emergency; therefore, it is
important to estimate separately the
incidents of heat-related illnesses that
are heat emergencies and those that are
not heat emergencies. Using the
methods detailed in Section VIII.E.,
Benefits, OSHA estimated the average
expected annual number of heat-related
illnesses by industry sector after the
implementation of the proposed
standard, including adjustments for
effectiveness and undercount as
described below. Using the estimates of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heat-related fatal and non-fatal illnesses
by industry sector from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries (CFOI) (BLS,
2024c) and Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) from 2011–
2022 (BLS, 2023b), OSHA assumed an
undercount by a factor of 7.5 for nonfatal heat-related illnesses and 3 for fatal
heat-related illnesses. As also discussed
in Section V.C., Risk Reduction and
Section VIII.E., Benefits, OSHA also
assumed an effectiveness rate of 95
percent in reducing heat-related fatal
illnesses and 65 percent for non-fatal
illnesses. Finally, since costs are
dependent on the severity of illness,
OSHA assumed that 5.3 percent 56 of
heat-related illnesses are emergencies,
56 OSHA estimated the percentage of heat-related
illnesses that would be considered emergencies
using Harduar Morano and Watkins (2017). Using
their results reported in table 2 in that paper, OSHA
calculated the percentage of all HRIs reviewed
(emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and
deaths) that were coded as heat stroke (5.3 percent).
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and all others are considered nonemergencies for this analysis. Then, the
number of estimated incidents for each
sector was divided by the number of
establishments deemed in-scope of the
proposed standard to calculate the
estimated per-establishment incident
rate for each sector. OSHA welcomes
feedback on the data, assumptions, and
methods used to estimate the number of
heat-related illnesses (emergencies and
non-emergencies) by sector, as well as
the per-establishment incidence rates by
sector.
Table VIII.C.6. shows the total
estimated number of heat-related illness
emergencies and non-emergencies
anticipated annually with the proposed
standard in place for each sector, as well
as per-establishment incidence rates for
each sector.57
57 This assumes that rates in the future will be the
same as rates in the recent past. This may be
inaccurate if rates are reduced due to the efficacy
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
Continued
30AUP2
70832
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
OSHA welcomes feedback on the
assumptions, methods of estimation,
and data used to estimate perestablishment incidence rates
(emergencies and non-emergencies) for
each sector. OSHA acknowledges the
possibility that there may be variability
in underreporting by industry sector,
occupation, or some other measure and
welcomes additional data or
information on that possibility.
TABLE VIII.C.6.—SUMMARY OF HEAT-RELATED ILLNESSES—NON-EMERGENCIES AND EMERGENCIES BY SECTOR
Non-emergencies
Emergencies
Sector
Annual Incidents
11 .....................................................................................
21 .....................................................................................
22 .....................................................................................
23 .....................................................................................
31–33 ...............................................................................
42 .....................................................................................
44–45 ...............................................................................
48–49 ...............................................................................
51 .....................................................................................
52 .....................................................................................
53 .....................................................................................
54 .....................................................................................
55 .....................................................................................
56 .....................................................................................
61 .....................................................................................
62 .....................................................................................
71 .....................................................................................
72 .....................................................................................
81 .....................................................................................
92 .....................................................................................
249
120
68
1,270
1,056
325
456
808
236
27
141
102
51
729
23
207
112
255
259
1,643
Incidence rate
Annual incidents
0.002
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.007
0.008
0.003
0.004
0.011
0.000
0.003
0.001
0.007
0.013
0.001
0.005
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.317
16
8
4
80
62
19
26
46
14
2
8
6
3
44
1
12
7
15
15
94
Incidence rate
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.018
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023b, and BLS, 2024c.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Labor Rates
Labor costs associated with the
proposed standard are derived using
wage data from BLS’ cross-industry
Occupational Employment and Wage
Statistics (OEWS) for May 2022 (BLS,
2023c). For the purposes of this cost
analysis, two employee types are used
to represent affected employees:
‘‘designated person’’ and ‘‘at-risk
worker.’’ For each industry sector,
OSHA estimated the average hourly
wage for these two employee types.
For the purpose of estimating costs,
wages for the designated person
position were derived by filtering the
OEWS data for occupations that
included ‘‘Manager,’’ ‘‘Supervisor,’’ or
‘‘Director’’ in their Standard
Occupational Classification (SOC) title
and then reviewing those occupations to
identify those that may be expected to
directly supervise employees exposed to
heat-related hazards.58 Occupations
used in the analysis include those (1)
that have detailed occupation codes
(i.e., six-digit SOC code), (2) deemed to
supervise potentially at-risk employees,
(3) with recorded employment numbers,
and (4) with recorded median hourly
wage data. For these occupations, OSHA
calculated the percentage of each
of this proposed standard or if rates increase if more
workers are exposed to hot environments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
industry sector’s total available
employment that each detailed
occupation represented. OSHA then
calculated the weighted average hourly
wage for each sector using the product
of these percentages and the
corresponding median hourly wage
estimates from the OEWS. OSHA
assumes that the average hourly wages
calculated for each represent those for
designated workers. OSHA
acknowledges that this method of
estimation may lead to an overestimate
in wage costs as the designated person
does not necessarily have to be a
supervisor, manager, or director in all
cases. For this analysis, OSHA also uses
these wages developed for designated
persons to represent supervisors’ wages.
OSHA welcomes feedback on the
assumptions, methods, and data used to
estimate the wages of a designated
person.
Wages for at-risk workers are
calculated using a process similar to the
process used to calculate the number of
affected employees in section
VIII.B.IV.A. The main differences for
determining the wages for at-risk
workers are that the methodology for
estimating wages uses OEWS data at the
2-digit NAICS sector level instead of the
4-digit NAICS industry group level and
that some occupations that are
otherwise used to determine the
percentage of employees that are
exposed to heat-related hazards are not
included for the wage calculation
because the relevant employment and/
or wage data are undisclosed. OSHA
calculated the percentage of a given
sector’s at-risk employment made up by
each SOC code and multiplied this
percentage by the hourly median wage
from OEWS. Finally, OSHA summed
these products for each sector to
estimate the weighted average hourly
wage for at-risk workers in each sector.
OSHA uses the estimated hourly wage
rates to calculate a loaded wage rate that
includes three types of cost: hourly base
wage, fringe benefits, and overhead
costs.
For the calculation of fringe benefit
costs, OSHA used data from BLS’
Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation (ECEC) for December
2023 (BLS, 2024b) to determine that
fringe benefits can be estimated as 45
percent of base wages or 31.1 percent of
total compensation.
OSHA also accounts for indirect
expenses that cannot be tied to
producing a specific product or service,
called overhead costs. Common
58 Although for purposes of this cost analysis
OSHA distinguishes between a ‘‘designated person’’
and ‘‘at-risk workers,’’ this terminology is not
intended to suggest that supervisors or managers
who supervise workers exposed to heat related
hazards are not themselves also ‘‘at risk’’ when
exposed to the same hazards.
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
examples include rent, utilities, and
office equipment. There is no consensus
on the cost elements that fit this
definition and the lack of a common
definition has led to a wide range of
overhead estimates. Consequently, the
treatment of overhead costs needs to be
case-specific. In this analysis, OSHA
used an overhead rate of 17 percent of
base wages (EPA, 2002; Rice, 2002).
This 17 percent rate is based on an
estimate of overhead costs for safety and
health professionals in large private
organizations. This overhead rate is
consistent with, for example, the
overhead rate used in the Final
Economic Analysis (FEA) in support of
OSHA’s 2023 final rule amending its
occupational injury and illness
recordkeeping (88 FR 47254) and the
economic feasibility analysis in support
of OSHA’s 2021 Healthcare Emergency
Temporary Standard (Healthcare
ETS).59 (86 FR 32376). OSHA expects
that this rate is likely an overestimate in
this context, as this reflects a
component of average overhead; in this
case, however, the agency anticipates
that, for example, designated persons
and at-risk workers will be able to work
within the general physical
infrastructure in which they currently
70833
operate. A rate of 17 percent of base
wages is equivalent to 11.71 percent of
the hourly wage rate with fringe
applied.60
To calculate the fully loaded hourly
labor cost, OSHA added the three
components together: base wages +
fringe benefits (31.1 percent of total
compensation) + applicable overhead
(17 percent of base wages). Table
VIII.C.7. shows the loaded hourly wages
used in the analysis. OSHA welcomes
feedback on the assumptions, methods,
and data used to estimate the wages of
a designated person and at-risk worker.
TABLE VIII.C.7—WAGE RATES USED IN THE ANALYSIS
[2023$]
Median hourly
wage a
Sector
Fringe-adjusted
overhead c
(%)
Fringe b
(%)
Loaded hourly
wage d
Designated Person
11 .............................................................................................
21 .............................................................................................
22 .............................................................................................
23 .............................................................................................
31–33 .......................................................................................
42 .............................................................................................
44–45 .......................................................................................
48–49 .......................................................................................
51 .............................................................................................
52 .............................................................................................
53 .............................................................................................
54 .............................................................................................
55 .............................................................................................
56 .............................................................................................
61 .............................................................................................
62 .............................................................................................
71 .............................................................................................
72 .............................................................................................
81 .............................................................................................
92 .............................................................................................
$30.73
50.76
57.93
42.26
43.15
42.41
26.45
37.37
54.75
49.94
36.94
59.00
60.81
34.51
36.68
34.49
28.83
20.50
33.58
45.08
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
$49.83
82.31
93.94
68.53
69.97
68.77
42.89
60.59
88.78
80.98
59.91
95.67
98.62
55.97
59.49
$55.92
46.75
33.24
54.45
73.10
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
26.80
46.46
75.53
43.95
36.68
42.34
26.28
33.27
57.54
58.24
37.44
76.34
88.02
27.56
32.68
28.48
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
At-Risk Worker
11 .............................................................................................
21 .............................................................................................
22 .............................................................................................
23 .............................................................................................
31–33 .......................................................................................
42 .............................................................................................
44–45 .......................................................................................
48–49 .......................................................................................
51 .............................................................................................
52 .............................................................................................
53 .............................................................................................
54 .............................................................................................
55 .............................................................................................
56 .............................................................................................
61 .............................................................................................
62 .............................................................................................
59 See the FEAs in in the Improved Tracking of
Workplace Injuries and Illnesses FEA (https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-07-21/pdf/
2023-15091.pdf) and the feasibility analysis support
of OSHA’s 2021 Healthcare ETS (86 FR 32376)
(https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-0621/pdf/2021-12428.pdf).The methodology was
modeled after an approach used by the EPA. More
information on this approach can be found at: U.S.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
16.53
28.65
46.58
27.10
22.62
26.11
16.21
20.52
35.48
35.92
23.09
47.08
54.28
17.00
20.15
17.56
Environmental Protection Agency, ‘‘Wage Rates for
Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory
Program,’’ June 10, 2002 (Ex. 2066). This analysis
itself was based on a survey of several large
chemical manufacturing plants: Heiden Associates,
Final Report: A Study of Industry Compliance Costs
Under the Final Comprehensive Assessment
Information Rule, Prepared for the Chemical
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Manufacturers Association, December 14, 1989, Ex.
2065.
60 The fringe-adjusted overhead rate, 11.71%, is
calculated as 68.9 percent * 17 percent, i.e., the
percent of wages that are the base hourly rate
exclusive of fringe (68.9 percent) multiplied by the
overhead rate as a percentage of base hourly wages
(17 percent).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70834
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.7—WAGE RATES USED IN THE ANALYSIS—Continued
[2023$]
71
72
81
92
.............................................................................................
.............................................................................................
.............................................................................................
.............................................................................................
Fringe-adjusted
overhead c
(%)
Fringe b
(%)
Median hourly
wage a
Sector
15.55
14.88
21.17
31.28
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
Loaded hourly
wage d
25.21
24.13
34.33
50.72
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
a Median hourly wage rates are drawn from BLS’ sector-level OEWS for May 2022. For the designated person, the wages represent a weighted average of wage across SOC codes that would directly supervise potentially at-risk workers. For the at-risk worker, the wages reflect weighted averages between SOC codes that are deemed in-scope for this proposed standard.
b The fringe rate is drawn from BLS’ ECEC for December 2023 (BLS, 2024b).
c The overhead rate is derived from EPA (2002) and Rice (2002).
d The loaded hourly wage = median hourly wage *(1 + fringe rate) * (1 + fringe-adjusted overhead rate).
IV. Estimated Unit Costs of Compliance
This section presents the estimated
unit costs of the proposed standard by
industry sector and proposed provision.
Unless otherwise noted in this section,
the time estimates for complying with
proposed provisions are based on
OSHA’s professional expertise,
considering what the proposed standard
requires and estimates of the hours
necessary to comply with similar
requirements in other OSHA rules.
OSHA welcomes comment on all
estimates discussed here. Additional
data or suggestions on methodological
changes the agency should consider are
also welcome.
A. Rule Familiarization
All employers affected by the
proposed standard would need to
review the requirements under the
proposed standard. While some
employers will read the standard, many
will likely rely on compliance
assistance documents prepared by
OSHA or by trade or industry
associations that will provide the
needed information in a simpler manner
that would take less time to review and
digest than the regulatory language.
OSHA estimates that rule
familiarization would take a designated
person one hour to complete. Table
VIII.C.8. shows the unit costs for rule
familiarization by industry sector.
B. Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
Plan (HIIPP)
TABLE VIII.C.8—UNIT COSTS—RULE FAMILIARIZATION
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
Unit cost
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
$49.83
82.31
93.94
68.53
69.97
68.77
42.89
60.59
88.78
80.98
59.91
95.67
98.62
55.97
59.49
55.92
46.75
33.24
54.45
73.10
Labor category
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Basis
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Frequency
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
Under paragraph (c) of the proposed
standard, employers must create a
written HIIPP,61 with the input from
employees. OSHA acknowledges that
some employers may already have an
existing HIIPP that may only need to be
61 Employers with 10 or fewer employees do not
have to write out their HIIPP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
modified to comply with the proposed
standard. The HIIPP must include:
• A comprehensive list of the types of
work activities covered by the plan;
• All policies and procedures
necessary to comply with the
requirements of this proposed standard
including those to protect employees
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
while wearing vapor-impermeable
clothing; and
• Identification of the heat metric
(i.e., heat index or wet bulb globe
temperature) the employer will monitor
to identify heat hazards.
Further, the employer must designate
one or more heat safety coordinators to
implement and monitor the HIIPP, make
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
review, identify relevant sections, and
fill in worksite-specific information on
hazards, controls, and procedures. For
employers that are exempt from writing
their HIIPP (i.e., those with ten or less
employees) OSHA assumes that they
will spend four hours using a template
to guide their creation of a HIIPP. OSHA
assumes that five percent of employers
will have complex or unique situations
where a template would not be usable.
For these employees, OSHA estimates
that it will take 30 hours of a designated
person’s time to prepare the HIIPP.
OSHA welcomes comments and input
on these estimates and assumptions.
The agency would like information and
data on how these estimates correspond
to the costs incurred by employers who
have developed written HIIPPs, whether
the time estimates are reasonable, and
what method employers have taken
when developing their plans.
Additionally, the proposed standard
would require employers to review and
update the HIIPP periodically.
Regardless of how employers develop or
modify their HIIPPs initially, OSHA
estimates that the process of reviewing
and updating the HIIPP would take the
the HIIPP readily available to all
employees in a language that all
employees understand, and review the
HIIPP whenever a heat-related incident
occurs those results in death, days away
from work, medical treatment beyond
first aid, or loss of consciousness. The
review of the HIIPP must occur at least
annually.
For employers with an existing HIIPP
in place, OSHA assumes that employers
will designate someone to review their
HIIPP and make any modifications
necessary to comply with the proposed
standard. OSHA estimates this process
will require 2.5 hours of the designated
person’s time. Employers that do not
have an existing HIIPP could either
choose to use a HIIPP template (for
example, one provided by OSHA as part
of rollout materials or one from a trade
organization) or write a HIIPP from
scratch. Because writing a HIIPP from
scratch without the help of a template
would be considerably more onerous,
OSHA expects that most employers
would not choose this option and
would, instead, opt to use a template
which the agency estimates would
require approximately six hours of a
designated person’s time to locate,
70835
person designated on average one hour
per year to do so.
The proposed standard would also
require that employers involve nonmanagerial employees in the creation or
initial modification of the HIIPP, as well
as in the process of periodically
reviewing and updating the HIIPP.
OSHA assumes that a representative
group of employees (four employees per
establishment) will take one hour each
during the initial development of the
HIIPP to provide feedback, regardless of
whether the employer has an existing
HIIPP. This same representative group
of employees would take 20 minutes
each during the review and update of
the HIIPP to provide feedback. OSHA
welcomes comments and input on these
estimates and assumptions. The agency
would like information and data on how
these estimates correspond to the costs
incurred by employers who have
developed written HIIPPs, whether the
time estimates are reasonable, and what
method employers have taken when
developing their plans.
Table VIII.C.9. shows the units costs
for developing and updating the HIIPP
by industry sector.
TABLE VIII.C.9—UNIT COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
Write HIIPP from Scratch
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
$1,494.92
2,469.40
2,818.32
2,055.78
2,099.13
2,063.18
1,286.74
1,817.75
2,663.34
2,429.29
1,797.15
2,869.97
2,958.49
1,678.99
1,784.56
1,677.73
1,402.49
997.21
1,633.62
2,193.10
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Review and Modify HIIPP—Existing Plan in Place
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
124.58
205.78
234.86
171.31
174.93
171.93
107.23
151.48
221.94
202.44
149.76
Frm 00139
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Fmt 4701
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Sfmt 4702
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70836
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.9—UNIT COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
Hours
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
Unit cost
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
Labor category
239.16
246.54
139.92
148.71
139.81
116.87
83.10
136.14
182.76
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
Frequency
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Use HIIPP Template
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
298.98
493.88
563.66
411.16
419.83
412.64
257.35
363.55
532.67
485.86
359.43
573.99
591.70
335.80
356.91
335.55
280.50
199.44
326.72
438.62
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
No Written HIIPP
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
199.32
329.25
375.78
274.10
279.88
275.09
171.57
242.37
355.11
323.91
239.62
382.66
394.46
223.87
237.94
223.70
187.00
132.96
217.82
292.41
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
HIIPP Development Involvement—Employee
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
26.80
46.46
75.53
43.95
36.68
42.34
26.28
33.27
57.54
58.24
37.44
76.34
88.02
Frm 00140
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Fmt 4701
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Sfmt 4702
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70837
TABLE VIII.C.9—UNIT COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
Hours
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
Unit cost
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
27.56
32.68
28.48
25.21
24.13
34.33
50.72
Labor category
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Basis
Frequency
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Review and Update HIIPP
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
49.83
82.31
93.94
68.53
69.97
68.77
42.89
60.59
88.78
80.98
59.91
95.67
98.62
55.97
59.49
55.92
46.75
33.24
54.45
73.10
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
HIIPP Review and Update Involvement—Employee
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
8.93
15.49
25.18
14.65
12.23
14.11
8.76
11.09
19.18
19.41
12.48
25.45
29.34
9.19
10.89
9.49
8.40
8.04
11.44
16.91
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Identifying Heat Hazards
The proposed standard would require
employers to assess where and when
employees are exposed to temperatures
at or above the initial and high heat
triggers. For outdoor work sites, the
proposed standard would require
employers to monitor heat conditions
using either local heat index forecasts or
on-site measurement of heat index or
wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT).
OSHA assumes that all outdoor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
employers without current monitoring
practices will choose the option to
monitor local forecasts since the time
necessary to do so would be minimal
(and many individuals check local
forecasts regularly without regard to this
proposed standard). Employers may
have a designated person at each work
site track local forecasts of ambient
temperature and humidity provided by
the National Weather Service (NWS) (or
others) to determine the daily maximum
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
heat index, which the employer would
then use to determine which protocols
are triggered, if any. For this analysis,
OSHA assumes that employers, on
average, will take approximately 15
seconds twice a day to monitor the local
forecast via a smart phone app.
Alternatively, employers can set up
monitoring devices as close as possible
to the work area to conduct on-site
monitoring. Employers may choose
between measuring the heat index or
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70838
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
WBGT using monitoring devices.
Employers with indoor work sites do
not have the option of monitoring local
weather forecasts. The first approach,
measuring the heat index, would require
the employer to designate someone to
take measurements of the heat index, or
to measure separately the ambient
temperature and humidity to calculate
heat index (if needed, using the OSHA–
NIOSH Heat Safety Tool App as a
calculator or the online calculator
available from the NWS). OSHA
estimates that on average, it will take
the designated person 1 minute each
time they measure the heat index or
ambient temperature and humidity,
including calculating the heat index
(e.g., by consulting the OSHA–NIOSH
App or NWS’s online calculator). OSHA
also assumes that measurements will be
taken on average twice per work day
(260 days per year) and that employers
using this approach will use a
temperature and humidity logger that is
capable of automatically uploading
relevant environmental information for
recordkeeping purposes. OSHA assumes
that the designated person will spend 15
minutes to read the logger’s user
manual. OSHA also assumes that all
indoor employers without current
monitoring in place will adopt this
option.
The second approach, measuring the
WBGT, would require the employer to
designate someone to take
measurements of wet bulb globe
temperature. This approach would
require the purchase of one WBGT
thermometer for each worksite and
some of a designated person’s time to
read the thermometer manual. OSHA
assumes that no employers will adopt
this option, however some employers
may already be using this method.
Those employers can continue to use
this method under this proposed
standard and are not estimated to incur
any costs to do so since they are already
in compliance.
Employers with indoor work sites
would be required to conduct a hazard
evaluation to identify the work areas
where there is a reasonable expectation
that employees are or may be exposed
to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger. OSHA estimates that conducting
the hazard evaluation would require
about 3 hours in total.
Employers would be required to seek
the input and involvement of nonmanagerial employees and their
representatives, if any, when evaluating
the work site to identify work areas with
a reasonable expectation of exposures at
or above the initial heat trigger and in
developing and updating monitoring
plans. The time to develop monitoring
plans, as well as the time for employee
input, is already captured within the
time estimate for HIIPP development
and employee involvement in HIIPP
development. Otherwise, OSHA
estimates that employee input for
evaluating work sites would require 15
minutes per employee providing input.
For this analysis, OSHA assumes four
employees per establishment would
provide input.
The proposed standard would allow
employers to forgo taking measurements
if they assume that a work area meets
or exceeds both heat triggers. Employers
that elect to do this would not incur
monitoring costs. These employers
would be required to comply with all
control measures required at both the
initial and high heat triggers as though
they took a measurement that meets or
exceeds the high heat trigger. OSHA
assumes that no employers will newly
adopt this option, because the Annual.
monitoring cost per establishment is
relatively low compared to the costs to
implement other parts of the rule that
would be required for employers
choosing this option. Most employers
will find it less expensive to monitor
temperatures and implement the
requirements when a trigger is met or
exceeded. OSHA welcomes feedback on
this assumption, specifically the types
of employers that might forgo
monitoring and assume that their
workplace is at or above both heat
triggers.
Table VIII.C.10. shows the labor-based
unit costs for identifying heat hazards
by industry sector. Table VIII.C.11.
shows the equipment costs that
employers would incur to comply with
the requirements for identifying heat
hazards.
TABLE VIII.C.10—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Outdoor Environmental Monitoring
11 ........................................
21 ........................................
22 ........................................
23 ........................................
31–33 ..................................
42 ........................................
44–45 ..................................
48–49 ..................................
51 ........................................
52 ........................................
53 ........................................
54 ........................................
55 ........................................
56 ........................................
61 ........................................
62 ........................................
71 ........................................
72 ........................................
81 ........................................
92 ........................................
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
$107.97
178.35
203.55
148.47
151.60
149.01
92.93
131.28
192.35
175.45
129.79
207.28
213.67
121.26
128.88
121.17
101.29
72.02
117.98
158.39
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Establishment ....................
Establishment ....................
Annual.
Annual.
Indoor Environmental Monitoring
11 ........................................
21 ........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
8.7
8.7
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
431.87
713.38
Frm 00142
Designated Person ............
Designated Person ............
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70839
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.10—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
22 ........................................
23 ........................................
31–33 ..................................
42 ........................................
44–45 ..................................
48–49 ..................................
51 ........................................
52 ........................................
53 ........................................
54 ........................................
55 ........................................
56 ........................................
61 ........................................
62 ........................................
71 ........................................
72 ........................................
81 ........................................
92 ........................................
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
814.18
593.89
606.42
596.03
371.72
525.13
769.41
701.80
519.18
829.10
854.67
485.04
515.54
484.68
405.16
288.08
471.94
633.56
Labor category
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Basis
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Frequency
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
Every
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
Years.
....................
....................
....................
....................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Indoor Identification of Heat-Exposed Work Areas
11 ........................................
21 ........................................
22 ........................................
23 ........................................
31–33 ..................................
42 ........................................
44–45 ..................................
48–49 ..................................
51 ........................................
52 ........................................
53 ........................................
54 ........................................
55 ........................................
56 ........................................
61 ........................................
62 ........................................
71 ........................................
72 ........................................
81 ........................................
92 ........................................
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
149.49
246.94
281.83
205.58
209.91
206.32
128.67
181.77
266.33
242.93
179.72
287.00
295.85
167.90
178.46
167.77
140.25
99.72
163.36
219.31
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Work Area Evaluation—Employee
11 ........................................
21 ........................................
22 ........................................
23 ........................................
31–33 ..................................
42 ........................................
44–45 ..................................
48–49 ..................................
51 ........................................
52 ........................................
53 ........................................
54 ........................................
55 ........................................
56 ........................................
61 ........................................
62 ........................................
71 ........................................
72 ........................................
81 ........................................
92 ........................................
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
6.70
11.61
18.88
10.99
9.17
10.58
6.57
8.32
14.38
14.56
9.36
19.08
22.01
6.89
8.17
7.12
6.30
6.03
8.58
12.68
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Review Monitoring Equipment User Manual—Indoor
11
21
22
23
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
12.46
20.58
23.49
17.13
Frm 00143
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Fmt 4701
Person
Person
Person
Person
Sfmt 4702
............
............
............
............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70840
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.10—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
31–33 ..................................
42 ........................................
44–45 ..................................
48–49 ..................................
51 ........................................
52 ........................................
53 ........................................
54 ........................................
55 ........................................
56 ........................................
61 ........................................
62 ........................................
71 ........................................
72 ........................................
81 ........................................
92 ........................................
Unit cost
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Labor category
17.49
17.19
10.72
15.15
22.19
20.24
14.98
23.92
24.65
13.99
14.87
13.98
11.69
8.31
13.61
18.28
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Frequency
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
TABLE VIII.C.11—EQUIPMENT-BASED UNIT COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS
[2023$]
Item
Units
Monitoring Equipment—Indoor .........
Unit cost
1.0
Total cost per
unit
99.00
99.00
Basis
Establishment ...................................
Frequency
One-Time.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: Kestrel Instruments, 2024.
D. Requirements at or Above the
Initial Heat Trigger
When employees are exposed to heat
at or above the initial heat trigger, the
proposed standard includes provisions
related to drinking water, break areas,
work area controls, acclimatization, rest
breaks, and effective communication.
The costs associated with the evaluation
of fan use in paragraph I(6) are included
as part of the planning and hazard
evaluation discussed in section
VIII.C.IV.C. OSHA has not included
costs related to cooling PPE as included
in proposed paragraph I(e)(10). Based on
feedback from Small Entity
Representatives who spoke on the topic
during the SBAR Panel process, OSHA
believes that use of cooling PPE is not
widespread. Where employers are
requiring or permitting the use of
cooling PPE, OSHA expects that these
employers will train employees to
remove the PPE once it loses its cooling
properties and will include this
requirement in their HIIPPs. The cost for
this would be included in the costs
associated with proposed paragraphs (c)
and (h).
I. Drinking Water
Employers would be required to
provide access to one quart (32 fluid
ounces) of suitably cool drinking water
per employee per hour for the entire
shift. To comply with this requirement
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
at both outdoor and indoor work sites,
OSHA assumes employers would
purchase 40-quart water coolers (with
spigots) sufficient to provide the
required amount of water. For this
analysis, OSHA estimates that the cost
of one 40-quart cooler is incurred for
every 40 employees. Employers are
assumed to purchase one reusable water
bottle per employee. Because existing
OSHA standards already require
employers to provide drinking water,
OSHA assumes that nearly all
employers currently provide water to
their employees. The costs incurred to
comply with this proposed standard are
assumed to be a result of employers not
providing the quantity of water
specified by the proposed standard.
II. Break Area(s) at Outdoor Work Sites
For outdoor work sites, OSHA would
require employers to provide employees
working outdoors with a break area.
Break areas must be readily accessible to
the work area and able to accommodate
the number of employees on break.
Additionally, break areas must have
artificial or natural shade, or be an airconditioned space (e.g., trailers,
vehicles, structures). OSHA assumes
that employers without existing break
areas will use artificial shade in the
form of a 12x12 foot tent that all
employees on break can reasonably
access.
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
III. Break Area(s) and Work Area(s) at
Indoor Work Sites
OSHA would require employers with
indoor work sites to provide employees
at those sites with a break area. These
break areas must be readily accessible to
the work area and able to accommodate
the number of employees on break. This
space must be air-conditioned or have
increased air movement and, if
appropriate, de-humidification. OSHA
assumes that employers without
existing air-conditioned breakrooms
will designate a room or an area large
enough to accommodate employees on
break and that these areas will contain
adequate fans and dehumidifiers.
Further, employers would be required to
provide measures that reduce employee
exposure to heat in the work area. One
of the ways employers can comply with
this requirement is by providing
increased air movement and, if
appropriate, de-humidification.
Adequate fans and dehumidifiers could
be used to comply with this
requirement. Overall, OSHA assumes
that, in all States and territories in the
U.S., the average employer that does not
already have air conditioning, fans, or
dehumidifiers in place will provide two
fans per ten employees and, in States
where humid conditions may occur, the
average employer would also provide
two dehumidifiers per ten employees.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Acclimatization
The proposed standard would require
employers to adopt protections for new
and returning employees who may not
be acclimatized to working in the heat
at or above the initial heat trigger during
their first week on the job or their first
week back on the job after an employee
is away from work for more than 14
days. For new employees, OSHA
assumes that employers would
implement a plan that incorporates the
measures required in paragraph (f) when
the initial heat trigger is met or
exceeded during the first week of work.
For purposes of estimating the cost of
compliance with this provision, OSHA
calculated the cost of rest breaks and
observation for signs and symptoms
during an employee’s first week. While
paragraph (f) also requires a hazard
alert, OSHA assumes that the hazard
alert can be provided by the designated
person while conducting observation or
during training (for new employees).
The cost of rest breaks and
observation during the first week of
work, assuming 8-hour shifts that
coincide with heat index measurements
that meet or exceed the initial heat
trigger but do not meet the high heat
trigger, equates to roughly 41.75
minutes per day for every new indoor
employee and 47.75 minutes per day for
every new outdoor employee during the
employee’s first week on the job. These
estimates are the same for returning
employees during their first week after
returning to work when the heat index
is at or above the initial heat trigger. No
additional costs were estimated for new
or returning employees when the
temperature meets or exceeds the high
heat trigger, as employers are already
required to follow the high heat
procedures.
OSHA did not make an additional
adjustment for cost savings (see
Appendix A at the end of this section
for a description of cost savings
methodology) as the conditions of those
additional rest breaks are different (i.e.,
different temperature range-rest break
combination) than those at which the
estimates of labor productivity loss due
to pacing in the heat were calculated. To
the extent that pacing is reduced for
employees undergoing acclimatization
protocols, this could overstate the costs
of acclimatization. OSHA welcomes
comment on this issue and whether the
agency should extend the potential cost
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
70841
savings from reduced pacing to workers
during their acclimatization period.
defined three groups of employees with
varying existing break levels (see the
introduction in appendix A at the end
V. Rest Breaks if Needed
of this section for detailed definitions of
The proposed standard would require each group). Group 1 corresponds to
that employers allow and encourage
employees at establishments that do not
their employees to take paid rest breaks
currently provide rest breaks when the
if needed once the initial heat trigger is
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded.
met or exceeded to prevent overheating. Group 2 corresponds to employees at
OSHA assumes that, per 8-hour shift, at- establishments that do provide ifrisk employees will take one 10-minute
needed rest breaks when the initial heat
if-needed rest break.62 OSHA estimates, trigger is met or exceeded, but do not
on average, an additional two minutes
have required rest breaks for when the
for indoor employees per break and an
high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
additional four minutes for outdoor
Group 3 captures employees at
employees per break to account for the
establishments that have already
time to walk to and from the break
implemented rest breaks protocols that
63
area. OSHA welcomes feedback on the meet the rest break requirements
assumption that an average employee
outlined in this proposed standard.64
will take one ten-minute if-needed rest
As mentioned in section VIII.C.II.B.
break when the temperature is at or
and
detailed further in appendix A at
above the initial heat trigger and the
the end of this section, OSHA estimated
assumptions for travel time to and from
the minutes spent pacing for each of the
the break area for indoor and outdoor
three groups when they are working at
settings.
or above the initial heat trigger. Table
OSHA has preliminarily determined
VIII.C.12. below shows the time
that when employees are offered rest
(minutes) per 8-hour shift that OSHA
breaks, cost savings will accrue to
employers currently noncompliant with estimates employees in each group
currently spend pacing when the initial
the rest break requirements, as their
heat trigger is met or exceeded. Using
employees will work more efficiently
these estimates, OSHA assumes that
during the work time not spent on rest
breaks (i.e., pace less). At the initial heat with the implementation of if-needed
rest breaks, all employees in Group 1
trigger, some of the estimated unit cost
for if-needed rest breaks (i.e., 10 minutes (i.e., not currently taking any breaks)
will behave like Group 2 (i.e., those
plus travel time) will be offset by this
currently taking if-needed rest breaks at
reduction in pacing, which OSHA
considers as cost savings for employers. or above the initial heat trigger but not
scheduled rest breaks at or above the
For the purposes of calculating
high heat trigger), reducing their pacing
accrued employer cost savings, OSHA
(working more efficiently) by 14.0 ¥
62 If-needed rest breaks by new and returning
11.2 = 2.8 minutes per shift at the initial
employees when the temperature meets or exceeds
heat trigger.
the initial heat trigger and is below the high heat
For outdoor employees, this reduction
trigger are accounted for in the acclimatization costs
(section VIII.C.IV.D.IV). To avoid double counting,
in pacing translates into accrued cost
if-needed rest breaks were not costed for these
savings of 20 percent (2.8 minutes of
employees during their first week of work (for new
pacing reduced/14 minutes of if-needed
hires) or the first week back from leave (for
returning workers).
rest break time 65) of the unit time-cost
63 These estimates of time needed to walk to and
per break. This effectively reduces the
from the break area are meant to be averages across
unit cost of if-needed rest breaks for
all workers in all settings. In some large indoor
outdoor employees from 14 to 11.2
settings like warehouses or large manufacturing
minutes. Similarly, for indoor
facilities, the break area may be further from the
work areas than other indoor settings where the
employees, this reduction in pacing
break area may be directly adjacent to work areas.
reduces the unit time-cost by 2.8/12 =
In outdoor settings, OSHA expects the employer
23.33 percent, from 12 66 to 9.2 minutes
will use a mobile break area set up that allows the
break area to be relocated as close as possible to the
per 8-hour shift.
location employees are working on a given day.
However, OSHA recognizes that it may not always
be possible to have a break area immediately
adjacent to all outdoor work area(s) and some
outdoor work sites may have workers spread over
relatively large areas (e.g., some agricultural
settings, large-scale infrastructure construction
projects), which could result in slightly longer
times needed to walk to and from the break area.
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
64 OSHA estimates that approximately 6.1% of
employees are in Group 1, 46.9% are in Group 2,
and the remaining 47.0% are in Group 3.
65 10 minutes of if-needed rest break time and 4
minutes of travel time.
66 10 minutes of if-needed rest break time and 2
minutes of travel time.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70842
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.12—LABOR PRODUCTIVITY LOSS FROM PACING ABOVE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER BEFORE AND AFTER
IMPLEMENTATION OF REQUIRED IF NEEDED REST BREAKS AND LABOR COST SAVINGS PER 8-HOUR SHIFT PER EMPLOYEE
Labor productivity
loss from pacing
before required
initial heat trigger
rest breaks
(minutes)
Group
Group description
Group 1 ...............
Employees at establishments that do not currently provide any rest breaks.
Employees at establishments that provide rest breaks
that meet the initial heat trigger rest break requirements, but not the high heat trigger rest break requirements.
Employees at establishments that provide rest breaks
that meet the initial and high heat trigger rest break requirements.
Group 2 ...............
Group 3 ...............
Labor productivity
loss from pacing
after required
initial heat trigger
rest breaks
(minutes)
Estimated
labor cost
savings
(minutes)
14.0
11.2
2.8
11.2
11.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: OSHA estimates that approximately 6.1 percent of employees are in Group 1, 46.9 percent are in Group 2, and 47.0 percent are in
Group 3.
VI. Effective Communication
Employers would be required to
maintain a means of effective two-way
communication with employees
whenever the initial heat trigger is met
or exceeded. OSHA assumes that a
designated person would communicate
with each employee three times for
every 8-hour shift that meets or exceeds
the initial heat trigger and would spend
15 seconds on each communication. Atrisk workers are assumed to spend the
same amount of time in communication
with the designated person. It is
assumed that all employers and
employees have a current method for
effective two-way communication (e.g.,
cell phones, walkie talkies) that may be
currently used to communicate
information about work-related
concerns and that these methods may be
used when the initial heat trigger is met
or exceeded. OSHA welcomes
comments on existing methods of twoway communication between employees
and employers.
Table VIII.C.13. shows the unit costs
for the requirements at or above the
initial heat trigger by industry sector.
The rest break unit costs reported in
table VIII.C.13. do not reflect the cost
savings offset discussed above. Table
VIII.C.14. shows the equipment costs
(water coolers, water bottles, pedestal
fans, dehumidifiers, and tents for
artificial shade) that employers would
incur to comply with the requirements
when the initial heat trigger is met or
exceeded.
TABLE VIII.C.13—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
New Employee Acclimatization—Designated Person
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
$0.62
1.03
1.17
0.86
0.87
0.86
0.54
0.76
1.11
1.01
0.75
1.20
1.23
0.70
0.74
0.70
0.58
0.42
0.68
0.91
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Returning Employee Acclimatization—Designated Person
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0.62
1.03
1.17
0.86
0.87
0.86
Jkt 262001
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
PO 00000
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Frm 00146
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
Fmt 4701
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Sfmt 4702
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70843
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.13—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
Hours
Unit cost
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Labor category
0.54
0.76
1.11
1.01
0.75
1.20
1.23
0.70
0.74
0.70
0.58
0.42
0.68
0.91
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Frequency
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
New Indoor Employee Acclimatization
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
18.65
32.33
52.56
30.58
25.52
29.46
18.29
23.15
40.04
40.53
26.05
53.12
61.25
19.18
22.74
19.82
17.54
16.79
23.88
35.30
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
New Outdoor Employee Acclimatization
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
21.33
36.97
60.11
34.97
29.19
33.69
20.92
26.48
45.79
46.35
29.80
60.75
70.05
21.94
26.01
22.66
20.06
19.20
27.32
40.37
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Returning Indoor Employee Acclimatization
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
18.65
32.33
52.56
30.58
25.52
29.46
18.29
23.15
Jkt 262001
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
PO 00000
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Frm 00147
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70844
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.13—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
51
52
53
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Hours
Unit cost
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Labor category
40.04
40.53
26.05
53.12
61.25
19.18
22.74
19.82
17.54
16.79
23.88
35.30
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Basis
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Frequency
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
Trigger
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
(Up
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Days).
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Returning Outdoor Employee Acclimatization
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
21.33
36.97
60.11
34.97
29.19
33.69
20.92
26.48
45.79
46.35
29.80
60.75
70.05
21.94
26.01
22.66
20.06
19.20
27.32
40.37
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—Indoor
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
5.36
9.29
15.11
8.79
7.34
8.47
5.26
6.65
11.51
11.65
7.49
15.27
17.60
5.51
6.54
5.70
5.04
4.83
6.87
10.14
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—Outdoor
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
6.25
10.84
17.62
10.25
8.56
9.88
6.13
7.76
13.43
13.59
Jkt 262001
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
PO 00000
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Frm 00148
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70845
TABLE VIII.C.13—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
53
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
Hours
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Unit cost
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.23
Labor category
8.74
17.81
20.54
6.43
7.63
6.65
5.88
5.63
8.01
11.84
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Basis
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Frequency
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Initial
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Effective Communication—Supervisor
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.62
1.03
1.17
0.86
0.87
0.86
0.54
0.76
1.11
1.01
0.75
1.20
1.23
0.70
0.74
0.70
0.58
0.42
0.68
0.91
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Effective Communication—Employee
11 ..............
21 ..............
22 ..............
23 ..............
31–33 ........
42 ..............
44–45 ........
48–49 ........
51 ..............
52 ..............
53 ..............
54 ..............
55 ..............
56 ..............
61 ..............
62 ..............
71 ..............
72 ..............
81 ..............
92 ..............
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.33
0.58
0.94
0.55
0.46
0.53
0.33
0.42
0.72
0.73
0.47
0.95
1.10
0.34
0.41
0.36
0.32
0.30
0.43
0.63
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE VIII.C.14—EQUIPMENT-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER
[2023]
Item
Units
Coolers with Spigot ...........................
Reusable Water Bottle ......................
Outdoor Break Area Engineering
Control.
Air Movement ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Unit cost
Total cost
per unit
Basis
Frequency
1.0
1.0
1.0
$79.99
0.59
119.99
$79.99
0.59
119.99
Employee .........................................
Employee .........................................
Establishment ...................................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
2.0
134.99
269.98
Employee .........................................
One-Time.
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70846
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.14—EQUIPMENT-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—
Continued
[2023]
Item
Units
Humidity Control ...............................
Unit cost
2.0
Total cost
per unit
39.19
78.38
Basis
Employee .........................................
Frequency
One-Time.
Source: OSHA estimate based on Igloo Products Corp., 2024; DiscountMugs, 2024; Amazon.com, Inc, 2024a; Amazon.com, Inc., 2024b; and
WebstaurantStore, 2024.
When the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded, employers would be required
to provide a minimum of 15-minute
paid rest breaks at least every two hours.
The proposed standard specifies that a
meal break may count as a rest break,
even if it is not otherwise required by
law to be paid. For this analysis, OSHA
assumes two paid 15-minute rest breaks
and an unpaid meal break per at-risk
worker per 8-hour shift where the high
heat trigger is met or exceeded. At the
high heat trigger, employers must also
provide if-needed rest breaks (as part of
the requirements of the initial heat
trigger). Therefore, OSHA assumes that
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded, in addition to 30 minutes per
8-hour shift of scheduled rest break
time, at-risk workers would take a fiveminute if-needed rest break. The travel
time to walk to and from the break area
is also accounted for and OSHA
assumes two minutes for indoor
employees and four minutes for outdoor
employees per rest break.
Similar to the discussion in section
VIII.C.IV.D.V., OSHA estimated the
amount of time that employees spend
pacing themselves when the high heat
trigger is met or exceeded over an 8hour shift (see table VIII.C.15.). These
estimates reflect three groups of
employees based on their respective
establishments’ estimated compliance
with the rest break requirements
outlined in this proposed standard.
Group 1 corresponds to employees at
establishments that do not currently
provide rest breaks that meet the
requirements when the initial heat
trigger is met. Group 2 corresponds to
employees at establishments that do
provide if-needed rest breaks when the
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded,
but do not have required rest breaks for
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded. Group 3 captures employees
at establishments that have already
implemented rest breaks protocols that
meet the initial and high heat trigger
rest break requirements outlined in this
proposed standard.
Based on the estimates for pacing
mentioned in section VIII.C.II.B. and
detailed further in appendix A at the
end of this section, OSHA estimated the
reduction in pacing at the high heat
trigger; the estimates for pacing for each
group are shown in table VIII.C.15.
OSHA estimated that with the
implementation of scheduled rest breaks
as well as if-needed rest breaks at the
high heat trigger, employees in Group 1
(i.e., that are currently noncompliant
with scheduled rest breaks as well as ifneeded rest breaks) will behave like
those in Group 3 (i.e., rest break
protocols are consistent with the
requirements of the standard at both
triggers) and therefore their pacing
reduces by 40.6¥8.4 = 32.2 minutes.
This reduction in pacing translates into
32.2/47 = 68.51 percent of the unit timecost for rest breaks of 47 minutes and
32.2/41 = 78.53 percent out of the unit
time-cost for rest breaks of 41 minutes
saved for outdoor and indoor
employees, respectively.
Based on the estimates for pacing
mentioned in section VIII.C.II.B. and
detailed further in appendix A at the
end of this section and displayed in
table VIII.C.15., OSHA estimates that
with the implementation of scheduled
rest breaks at the high heat trigger,
employees in Group 2 (i.e., that are
currently noncompliant with only
scheduled rest breaks and currently
compliant with if-needed rest breaks)
will now behave like those in Group 3
and for those employees pacing is
reduced by 39.5¥8.4 = 31.1 minutes per
shift. This reduction in pacing (i.e.,
increase in worker efficiency) translates
into 31.1/47 = 66.17 percent of the unit
time-cost of 47 minutes 67 (31.1/41 =
75.85 percent out of the unit time-cost
of 41 minutes 68) saved for outdoor
(indoor) employees that are currently in
Group 2.69
67 2 × (15-minute scheduled break + 4-minute
travel time) + 1 × (5-minute if-needed rest break +
4-minute travel time).
68 2 × (15-minute scheduled break + 2-minute
travel time) + 1 × (5-minute if-needed rest break +
2-minute travel time).
69 For Group 2 as well as Group 1, for
presentation purposes, the denominator over which
unit time cost savings is translated as a share of the
unit time cost of high heat trigger rest breaks is
presented as 47 minutes for outdoor employees (41
minutes for indoor employees). The fact that
employees in Group 2 are already spending some
portion of the 47 minutes or 41 minutes in if-
needed rest breaks is already reflected in the
estimated (State-level) share of employees in Group
2, which is equivalent to the difference between the
(State-level) non-compliance rate for high heat
trigger rest breaks (scheduled as well as if-needed
rest breaks) and the (State-level) non-compliance
rate for initial heat trigger rest breaks (if-needed rest
breaks). Most of the employees in Group 2
(approximately 74 percent) are estimated to be
already taking if-needed rest breaks but not
scheduled breaks. The rest of the employees in
Group 2 are, in addition to if-needed rest breaks,
also already taking partial scheduled breaks that fall
short of (i.e., are not fully compliant with) the
scheduled breaks that are required in the proposed
standard. The purpose of such classification of
employees already taking partial scheduled breaks
as part of Group 2 (employees at establishments that
do not have required rest breaks for when the high
heat trigger is met or exceeded) is to avoid
overcomplicating the computation and presentation
of the cost savings. Such classification may
potentially result in the overestimation of cost
savings from the high heat trigger rest breaks.
However, as mentioned throughout this section,
there are also reasons why the cost savings are also
potentially underestimated (e.g., due to temperature
data limitations as mentioned in section
VIII.C.II.B.).
E. Requirements At or Above the High
Heat Trigger
When the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded, this proposed standard
includes provisions related to rest
breaks, observation of employees for
signs and symptoms of heat illness,
hazard alerts, and excessively high heat
areas.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Rest Breaks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70847
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.15—LABOR PRODUCTIVITY LOSS FROM SPENT PACING AT HIGH HEAT TRIGGER BEFORE AND AFTER
IMPLEMENTATION OF REQUIRED IF-NEEDED AND SCHEDULED REST BREAKS PER 8-HOUR SHIFT PER EMPLOYEE
Labor productivity
loss from pacing
at before required
high heat trigger
rest breaks
(minutes)
Group
Group description
Group 1 ...............
Employees at establishments that do not currently provide any rest breaks.
Employees at establishments that provide rest breaks
that meet the initial heat trigger rest break requirements.
Employees at establishments that provide rest breaks
that meet the initial and high heat trigger rest break requirements.
Group 2 ...............
Group 3 ...............
Labor productivity
loss from pacing
after required
high heat trigger
rest breaks
(minutes)
Estimated
labor cost
savings
(minutes)
40.6
8.4
32.2
39.5
8.4
31.1
8.4
8.4
0.0
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: OSHA estimates that approximately 6.1 percent of employees are in Group 1, 46.9 percent are in Group 2, and 47.0 percent are in
Group 3.
II. Observation for Signs and Symptoms
III. Hazard Alert
Employers would be required to
observe employees for signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness at or
above the high heat trigger. The
proposed standard provides options for
complying with this requirement,
including a mandatory buddy system
and observation of employees by a
supervisor or heat safety coordinator.
Additionally, the proposed standard has
a provision for communication with
employees who are lone workers every
2 hours. OSHA assumes that all
employers will use supervisors 70 to
conduct observation of employees 71
(with one supervisor or heat safety
coordinator responsible for observing no
more than 20 employees). OSHA
estimates this option would require 15
seconds of the designated person’s time
three times per employee for every
8-hour shift that meets or exceeds the
high heat trigger. This observation
requirement would also take 15 seconds
of each at-risk worker’s time three times
for every 8-hour shift that meets or
exceeds the high heat trigger.
When the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded, OSHA would require
employers to notify employees of the
importance of staying hydrated, their
right to take breaks, procedures to take
in a heat emergency, and the locations
of break areas and drinking water (for
mobile work sites). OSHA estimates that
it would take five minutes one time for
a designated person to prepare and
deliver the first notification message to
employees for the year or heat season,
and that for each subsequent
notification, the designated person will
use the same format and spend 30
seconds to update and resend the alert
for each 8-hour shift at or above the
initial heat trigger. OSHA assumes the
time for at-risk workers to review the
hazard alert is negligible and thus is not
estimated to require any time.
IV. Warning Signs for Excessively High
Heat Areas
temperatures that regularly exceed
120 °F. OSHA assumes that this
requirement imposes costs only to
certain industries that are likely to have
radiant heat sources (e.g., furnaces, hot
water systems, ovens, smelting
processes). OSHA assumes that this
control would require 1–2 warning signs
for each establishment in industries
where radiant heat sources are likely
present (or an average of 1.5 signs per
establishment). OSHA estimates it
would take a designated person 5
minutes to install each sign.
Table VIII.C.16. shows the unit costs
for the requirements under the high heat
trigger conditions by industry sector.
The rest break unit costs reported in
table VIII.C.16. do not reflect the cost
savings offset discussed above. Table
VIII.C.17. shows the equipment costs
that employers would incur in order to
comply with the requirements when the
high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
For indoor workplaces, employers
would be required to place warning
signs at areas with ambient
TABLE VIII.C.16—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—Indoor
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
70 For this analysis, OSHA uses the wages
developed for designated persons to represent
supervisors’ time as well.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
$18.31
31.74
51.61
30.03
25.07
28.93
17.96
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
71 OSHA was unable to estimate the number of
affected lone workers. OSHA assumes that the cost
of lone workers communication with supervisors is
the same as the cost of observation for the purposes
PO 00000
Frm 00151
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
of this analysis. The agency welcomes comment on
this assumption and additional data that would
allow OSHA to better estimate the costs for
communication with lone workers.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70848
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.16—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
54 ........................
55 ........................
56 ........................
61 ........................
62 ........................
71 ........................
72 ........................
81 ........................
92 ........................
Unit cost
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
0.68
22.74
39.32
39.80
25.58
52.16
60.15
18.84
22.33
19.46
17.23
16.49
23.46
34.66
Labor category
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Basis
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Frequency
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—Outdoor
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
54 ........................
55 ........................
56 ........................
61 ........................
62 ........................
71 ........................
72 ........................
81 ........................
92 ........................
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
0.78
20.99
36.39
59.17
34.43
28.73
33.17
20.59
26.06
45.07
45.62
29.33
59.80
68.95
21.59
25.60
22.31
19.75
18.90
26.89
39.73
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—Designated Person
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
54 ........................
55 ........................
56 ........................
61 ........................
62 ........................
71 ........................
72 ........................
81 ........................
92 ........................
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.62
1.03
1.17
0.86
0.87
0.86
0.54
0.76
1.11
1.01
0.75
1.20
1.23
0.70
0.74
0.70
0.58
0.42
0.68
0.91
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—At-Risk Worker
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
0.33
0.58
0.94
0.55
0.46
0.53
0.33
0.42
0.72
PO 00000
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Frm 00152
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70849
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.16—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
52
53
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
Hours
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
Unit cost
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Labor category
0.73
0.47
0.95
1.10
0.34
0.41
0.36
0.32
0.30
0.43
0.63
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Basis
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Frequency
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Heat
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Trigger.
Initial Hazard Alert—Supervisor
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
54 ........................
55 ........................
56 ........................
61 ........................
62 ........................
71 ........................
72 ........................
81 ........................
92 ........................
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
4.15
6.86
7.83
5.71
5.83
5.73
3.57
5.05
7.40
6.75
4.99
7.97
8.22
4.66
4.96
4.66
3.90
2.77
4.54
6.09
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Subsequent Hazard Alert—Supervisor
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
54 ........................
55 ........................
56 ........................
61 ........................
62 ........................
71 ........................
72 ........................
81 ........................
92 ........................
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.42
0.69
0.78
0.57
0.58
0.57
0.36
0.50
0.74
0.67
0.50
0.80
0.82
0.47
0.50
0.47
0.39
0.28
0.45
0.61
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
at
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Signage Placement
11 ........................
21 ........................
22 ........................
23 ........................
31–33 ..................
42 ........................
44–45 ..................
48–49 ..................
51 ........................
52 ........................
53 ........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
4.15
6.86
7.83
5.71
5.83
5.73
3.57
5.05
7.40
6.75
4.99
PO 00000
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Frm 00153
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Fmt 4701
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70850
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.16—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
92
Hours
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
Unit cost
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
Labor category
7.97
8.22
4.66
4.96
4.66
3.90
2.77
4.54
6.09
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Frequency
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
TABLE VIII.C.17—EQUIPMENT-BASED UNIT COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER
[2023$]
Item
Units
Warning Signs ..................................
Total cost per
unit
Unit cost
1.5
$13.50
$20.25
Basis
Establishment ...................................
Frequency
One-Time.
Source: OSHA based on SafetySign.com, 2024.
F. Heat Illness and Emergency Response
and Planning
In addition to requirements for a heat
emergency response plan that
employers must include in their HIIPP,
OSHA would require employers to
undertake certain activities for any atrisk worker experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness,
including requiring immediate action
appropriate to the severity of the illness
or emergency. There are other methods
to cool an individual experiencing a
heat emergency, but OSHA is estimating
costs here assuming that employers will
implement the method recommended
by the U.S. Army (Department of the
Army, 2023). The agency welcomes
comment on this issue and information
on methods currently used for cooling.
In the case of a non-emergency heatrelated illness, OSHA estimates that a
designated person will spend 45
minutes per incident monitoring the
employee. When an employee is
suspected of a heat emergency, the
proposed standard would require
immediate action to reduce body
temperature. OSHA estimates this
would take 12.5 minutes per incident
(based on Casa et al., 2007),
accompanied by an immediate call to
emergency medical services (EMS)
taking an estimated 2 minutes.72 For any
employee experiencing a heat
emergency working in a location that is
off a roadway that needs EMS, a
designated person will spend time
transporting the employee to a location
where EMS can reach them. OSHA
estimated that, on average, it will take
a designated person 30 minutes to
transport an employee per incident.73
Finally, OSHA would require employers
to have a way to reduce an employee’s
body temperature when necessary.
OSHA assumes that employers will use
two sets of four bed sheets 74 that have
been wetted and cooled per employee
experiencing a heat emergency, with
one set on the employee and one set in
a cooler such that they can be swapped
every three minutes. OSHA further
assumes that employers will need to
have supplies on hand to potentially
handle two incidents concurrently. In
all, this means that an employer would
need 16 sheets (8 per individual to cool
two individuals, where four sheets can
be cooled while four are used which can
then be switched and reused in a cycle
of cooling then using the sheets) and
two coolers at their establishment, as
well as six seven-pound bags of ice 75 for
each 8-hour shift that meets or exceeds
the initial heat trigger.
See table VIII.C.6. for anticipated
annual incidence rates by sector used in
this analysis. Table VIII.C.18. shows the
unit costs for the requirements to
respond to and plan for heat-related
illnesses by severity of illness and
industry sector. Table VIII.C.19. shows
the equipment costs that employers
would incur in order to perform
emergency response procedures in the
event of a heat-related illness by
severity of illness (emergency or nonemergency).
TABLE VIII.C.18—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING
[2023$]
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
Medical Response—Non-Emergency
11 ............................
0.75
$37.37
72 OSHA estimates that a heat emergency will
require less time from a designated person because,
in a heat emergency, the affected employee will be
transported to a medical facility by EMS rather than
monitored for the duration at the work site.
73 This time estimate includes time for the
designated person to return to the work site.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Designated Person ......................
Incident ........................................
74 This assumption is based on guidance from the
U.S. Army on treatment of heat casualties. The
guidance suggests treating an ill person with two
sheets, one to wrap their body and the other for
their head, and to rotate between four sets of two
sheets every three minutes (Department of the
Army, 2023).
PO 00000
Frm 00154
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Annual.
75 OSHA assumes that approximately 50 percent
of employers will make and/or store ice on their
premises using existing freezers and/or ice
machines.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70851
TABLE VIII.C.18—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
21 ............................
22 ............................
23 ............................
31–33 ......................
42 ............................
44–45 ......................
48–49 ......................
51 ............................
52 ............................
53 ............................
54 ............................
55 ............................
56 ............................
61 ............................
62 ............................
71 ............................
72 ............................
81 ............................
92 ............................
Unit cost
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
Labor category
61.74
70.46
51.39
52.48
51.58
32.17
45.44
66.58
60.73
44.93
71.75
73.96
41.97
44.61
41.94
35.06
24.93
40.84
54.83
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Frequency
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Incident ........................................
Incident ........................................
Incident ........................................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Medical Response—Emergency
11 ............................
21 ............................
22 ............................
23 ............................
31–33 ......................
42 ............................
44–45 ......................
48–49 ......................
51 ............................
52 ............................
53 ............................
54 ............................
55 ............................
56 ............................
61 ............................
62 ............................
71 ............................
72 ............................
81 ............................
92 ............................
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
10.38
17.15
19.57
14.28
14.58
14.33
8.94
12.62
18.50
16.87
12.48
19.93
20.55
11.66
12.39
11.65
9.74
6.93
11.34
15.23
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Contact Emergency Medical Services
11 ............................
21 ............................
22 ............................
23 ............................
31–33 ......................
42 ............................
44–45 ......................
48–49 ......................
51 ............................
52 ............................
53 ............................
54 ............................
55 ............................
56 ............................
61 ............................
62 ............................
71 ............................
72 ............................
81 ............................
92 ............................
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
1.66
2.74
3.13
2.28
2.33
2.29
1.43
2.02
2.96
2.70
2.00
3.19
3.29
1.87
1.98
1.86
1.56
1.11
1.82
2.44
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Transport Worker
11 ............................
21 ............................
22 ............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0.50
0.50
0.50
Jkt 262001
24.92
41.16
46.97
PO 00000
Designated Person ......................
Designated Person ......................
Designated Person ......................
Frm 00155
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70852
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.18—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
Sector
Hours
23 ............................
31–33 ......................
42 ............................
44–45 ......................
48–49 ......................
51 ............................
52 ............................
53 ............................
54 ............................
55 ............................
56 ............................
61 ............................
62 ............................
71 ............................
72 ............................
81 ............................
92 ............................
Unit cost
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
Labor category
34.26
34.99
34.39
21.45
30.30
44.39
40.49
29.95
47.83
49.31
27.98
29.74
27.96
23.37
16.62
27.23
36.55
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Basis
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
Incident
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Frequency
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
TABLE VIII.C.19—EQUIPMENT-BASED UNIT COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING
[2023$]
Item
Units
Unit cost
$9.99
Total cost
Basis
Ice Sheets .........................................
Ice .....................................................
16.0
6.0
a 0.69
$159.84
4.14
Establishment ...................................
Establishment ...................................
Ice Cooler .........................................
2.0
31.70
63.40
Establishment ...................................
Frequency
One-Time.
Daily at Initial
Heat Trigger.
One-Time.
Source: OSHA based on Amazon.com, Inc., 2024c; W.W. Grainger, Inc., 2024; and Walmart Inc., 2024.
a Under the assumption that approximately 50 percent of employers will make and/or store ice on their premises using existing freezers and/or
ice machines, half of the unit cost of a seven-pound bags of ice = $1.38 ÷ 2 = $0.69 is reported.
The proposed standard would require
employers to develop and implement a
training program for employees and
supervisors. Training would be required
at certain frequencies, including
initially (e.g., prior to any work at or
above the initial heat trigger), annual
refresher training, and supplemental
training when necessary (e.g., following
each heat-related incident at the work
site, new job tasks, or changes in
employer policies and procedures).
OSHA assumes the training program
would be developed and implemented
by a designated person.
OSHA estimates a designated person
would spend four hours developing the
initial employee training program, 30
minutes preparing for the initial
employee training sessions, and one
hour administering each initial training
session.76 OSHA estimates that a
designated person would spend 15
minutes preparing for the refresher
employee training(s) and 30 minutes
conducting each refresher employee
training. Finally, OSHA estimates that
all employees would spend one hour
each for the initial employee training
and 30 minutes each for every refresher
employee training.
For the supervisor and heat safety
coordinator training, OSHA estimates
that a designated person would spend
four hours developing the initial
training, 15 minutes preparing, and one
hour per session to deliver the initial
supervisor training. OSHA estimates
that each supervisor and heat safety
coordinator would spend one hour
attending the supervisor training. For
supervisor refresher training, OSHA
estimates that a designated person
would spend 15 minutes preparing for
the refresher training and 30 minutes
conducting the refresher training. Each
supervisor and heat safety coordinator
would spend 30 minutes attending the
supervisor refresher training.
Finally, OSHA estimates that a
designated person would spend 15
minutes preparing supplemental
employee training and 30 minutes
conducting each supplemental
employee training. Each employee
would spend 30 minutes attending the
employee supplemental training. For
this analysis, OSHA assumes that these
supplemental trainings would be
conducted by one percent of
establishments each year and that one
percent of employees would attend
these supplemental trainings.
Table VIII.C.20. shows the unit costs
for the training requirements by
industry sector.
76 OSHA expects to provide training materials
and templates. To the extent that employers are able
to incorporate and develop training using those
materials and templates, this estimate may overstate
the amount of time needed to develop training.
OSHA welcomes comment on this issue, how
training is generally developed, how long that
development takes, and/or information about any
other costs related to training development.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
G. Training
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00156
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70853
TABLE VIII.C.20—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—TRAINING
[2023]
Sector
Hours
Unit cost
Labor category
Basis
Frequency
Initial Employee Training Development
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
$199.32
329.25
375.78
274.10
279.88
275.09
171.57
242.37
355.11
323.91
239.62
382.66
394.46
223.87
237.94
223.70
187.00
132.96
217.82
292.41
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment .......................
One-Time.
Initial Employee Training—Designated Person
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
74.75
123.47
140.92
102.79
104.96
103.16
64.34
90.89
133.17
121.46
89.86
143.50
147.92
83.95
89.23
83.89
70.12
49.86
81.68
109.66
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Initial Employee Training—At-Risk Worker
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
26.80
46.46
75.53
43.95
36.68
42.34
26.28
33.27
57.54
58.24
37.44
76.34
88.02
27.56
32.68
28.48
25.21
24.13
34.33
50.72
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Initial Supervisor Training Development
11 ..........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
2.0
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
99.66
Frm 00157
Designated Person ...............
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70854
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.20—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
Sector
Hours
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
Unit cost
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
164.63
187.89
137.05
139.94
137.55
85.78
121.18
177.56
161.95
119.81
191.33
197.23
111.93
118.97
111.85
93.50
66.48
108.91
146.21
Labor category
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Basis
Frequency
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
One-Time.
Initial Supervisor Training—Supervisor
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
62.29
102.89
117.43
85.66
87.46
85.97
53.61
75.74
110.97
101.22
74.88
119.58
123.27
69.96
74.36
69.91
58.44
41.55
68.07
91.38
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Initial Supervisor Training—Designated Person
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
49.83
82.31
93.94
68.53
69.97
68.77
42.89
60.59
88.78
80.98
59.91
95.67
98.62
55.97
59.49
55.92
46.75
33.24
54.45
73.10
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Annual Employee Refresher Training—Designated Person
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0.75
0.75
0.75
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
37.37
61.74
70.46
Frm 00158
Designated Person ...............
Designated Person ...............
Designated Person ...............
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Establishment .......................
Establishment .......................
Establishment .......................
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70855
TABLE VIII.C.20—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
Sector
Hours
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
Unit cost
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
51.39
52.48
51.58
32.17
45.44
66.58
60.73
44.93
71.75
73.96
41.97
44.61
41.94
35.06
24.93
40.84
54.83
Labor category
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Basis
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Frequency
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual Employee Refresher Training—At-Risk Worker
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
13.40
23.23
37.77
21.97
18.34
21.17
13.14
16.64
28.77
29.12
18.72
38.17
44.01
13.78
16.34
14.24
12.61
12.06
17.16
25.36
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Annual Supervisor Refresher Training—Supervisor
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.63
31.14
51.45
58.72
42.83
43.73
42.98
26.81
37.87
55.49
50.61
37.44
59.79
61.64
34.98
37.18
34.95
29.22
20.78
34.03
45.69
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual Supervisor Refresher Training—Designated Person
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
24.92
41.16
46.97
34.26
34.99
Frm 00159
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Fmt 4701
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Sfmt 4702
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70856
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.20—LABOR-BASED UNIT COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
Sector
Hours
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
Unit cost
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
34.39
21.45
30.30
44.39
40.49
29.95
47.83
49.31
27.98
29.74
27.96
23.37
16.62
27.23
36.55
Labor category
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Basis
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Frequency
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Annual.
Supplemental Employee Refresher Training—Designated Person
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
37.37
61.74
70.46
51.39
52.48
51.58
32.17
45.44
66.58
60.73
44.93
71.75
73.96
41.97
44.61
41.94
35.06
24.93
40.84
54.83
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Designated
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
Establishment
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Supplemental Employee Refresher Training—At-Risk Worker
11 ..........................................
21 ..........................................
22 ..........................................
23 ..........................................
31–33 ....................................
42 ..........................................
44–45 ....................................
48–49 ....................................
51 ..........................................
52 ..........................................
53 ..........................................
54 ..........................................
55 ..........................................
56 ..........................................
61 ..........................................
62 ..........................................
71 ..........................................
72 ..........................................
81 ..........................................
92 ..........................................
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
13.40
23.23
37.77
21.97
18.34
21.17
13.14
16.64
28.77
29.12
18.72
38.17
44.01
13.78
16.34
14.24
12.61
12.06
17.16
25.36
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
At-Risk
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Employee
Source: OSHA estimate derived from BLS, 2023c; BLS, 2024b; O*NET, 2023; EPA, 2002; and Rice, 2002.
H. Recordkeeping
The proposed standard would require
that indoor work area measurements be
retained for 6 months. OSHA assumes
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
that employers would purchase a
wireless temperature and humidity data
logger described in section VIII.C.IV.C.
(with the costs accounted for there) to
meet this requirement. Since employers
PO 00000
Frm 00160
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
would purchase data loggers that can
automatically record the heat index
measurements in and around a work
site, OSHA assumes employers would
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
incur no additional cost to comply with
this recordkeeping requirement.
V. Estimated Total Costs of Compliance
This section summarizes the
estimated total costs of compliance with
the proposed standard. The total costs
are generally calculated by multiplying
the basis for each cost (the number of
affected establishments or affected
employees as shown in Section VIII.B.
Profile of Affected Industries) by the
unit costs shown in section VIII.C.IV.
Each of these costs are then multiplied
by their corresponding non-compliance
rates (as shown in section VIII.C.II.A.) to
determine total compliance-adjusted
costs.
Many costs in this analysis are
incurred one time, and most others are
either annual or can be annualized
based on days of exposure or events that
happen multiple times per year. For the
purposes of this cost analysis, total costs
are annualized based on several
assumptions, such as estimates of the
number of hours at or above both heat
triggers and incidence rates for HRIs and
heat-related fatalities (see Section
VIII.C.II., Cost Assumptions for
additional detail). The exceptions are
the identification and evaluation of
heat-exposed work areas for indoor
work sites and the corresponding
employee involvement in that work area
evaluation, which are assumed to
impact 20 percent of establishments
each year. Based on that assumption,
OSHA estimates that these costs are
both incurred every five years. In order
to present compliance costs and benefits
estimates on a consistent basis across
proposed standard provisions, they are
presented as annualized costs.
For each provision described below,
this analysis annualizes one-time costs
using a 2 percent discount rate over a
10-year period. For the two costs
incurred every five years, OSHA
calculated the present value of these
costs assuming that they would be
incurred in the first year and the sixth
year after adoption of the proposed
standard using a 2 percent discount rate.
Using the present value of these costs,
OSHA then annualized using a 2
percent discount rate. Annualized onetime and annual costs, plus the
70857
annualized period costs, are then
summed to estimate total annualized
costs.
For each provision in the proposed
standard, OSHA also calculated the
estimated total annualized
undiscounted costs, using the same
method as above but assuming a 0
percent discount rate over a 10-year
period.
A. Rule Familiarization
All affected establishments would
incur rule familiarization costs. To
calculate the total cost of rule
familiarization, OSHA multiplies the
number of affected establishments from
table VIII.B.12. in Section VIII.B., Profile
of Affected Industries, by the unit costs
presented in table VIII.C.8. As all
affected employers incur this cost, no
compliance adjustment is necessary.
Table VIII.C.21. shows the annualized
one-time, annual, and total annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category, discounted (2 percent
over a 10-year period) and
undiscounted.
TABLE VIII.C.21—TOTAL COSTS—RULE FAMILIARIZATION
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing ....................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ...
Commercial Kitchens .......................................
Construction .....................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ..........
Landscaping and Facilities Support .................
Maintenance and Repair ..................................
Manufacturing ..................................................
Oil and Gas ......................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ...........................
Recreation and Amusement ............................
Sanitation and Waste Removal .......................
Telecommunications ........................................
Temporary Help Services ................................
Transportation ..................................................
Utilities .............................................................
Warehousing ....................................................
Non-Core .........................................................
$527,603
104,224
846,038
5,074,534
83,921
342,744
510,799
922,558
180,543
227,857
215,821
19,362
73,042
40,721
836,631
173,581
86,490
5,076,915
$587,362
116,029
941,865
5,649,302
93,426
381,565
568,655
1,027,052
200,992
253,665
240,265
21,555
81,316
45,333
931,392
193,241
96,286
5,651,954
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$527,603
104,224
846,038
5,074,534
83,921
342,744
510,799
922,558
180,543
227,857
215,821
19,362
73,042
40,721
836,631
173,581
86,490
5,076,915
$587,362
116,029
941,865
5,649,302
93,426
381,565
568,655
1,027,052
200,992
253,665
240,265
21,555
81,316
45,333
931,392
193,241
96,286
5,651,954
Total ..........................................................
15,343,382
17,081,254
0
15,343,382
17,081,254
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
B. Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
Plan (HIIPP)
All affected establishments would
incur costs for developing a HIIPP. For
those establishments that already have a
HIIPP, they are expected to review their
HIIPP and make any modifications
necessary to match the requirements
outlined in this proposed standard.
Section VIII.C.II.A. discusses the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
percentages of establishments with
HIIPPs already in place in certain
industries and States.
The proposed standard does not
require establishments with ten or less
employees to develop their HIIPP in
writing. For the purpose of this analysis,
OSHA assumed that all affected
establishments with ten or less
employees would choose to use OSHA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00161
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
template to guide their development of
an unwritten HIIPP. Of the remaining
establishments that do not have an
existing HIIPP and have more than ten
employees, OSHA assumes that, as
discussed in section VIII.C.IV.B., 90
percent of these establishments without
an existing plan would choose the less
burdensome option of using OSHA’s
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70858
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
template, while the other 10 percent
would write their HIIPP from scratch.77
Affected establishments would have
to review and update their HIIPPs
annually. The time to perform this
requirement (one hour) does not depend
on the option that establishments
choose when initially developing their
HIIPP.
The proposed standard would also
require that non-managerial employees
be involved in the development, review,
and update of the HIIPP. As discussed
in section VIII.C.IV.B., OSHA assumed
that four employees per establishment
would spend one hour providing input
on the development of the HIIPP and 20
minutes on the review and update of
their establishments’ HIIPP. These time
estimates are assumed to be the same
regardless of the option that the
establishment chooses when
developing, reviewing, and updating
their HIIPP. Table VIII.C.22. shows the
annualized one-time, annual, and total
annualized costs for each of these
requirements by industry category,
discounted (2 percent over a 10-year
period) and undiscounted.
TABLE VIII.C.22—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Total annualized
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Write HIIPP from Scratch
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
$571,516
79,076
687,870
736,175
34,901
147,130
149,423
316,372
123,156
287,792
123,726
13,733
90,704
41,207
336,424
196,764
99,757
4,758,864
$636,249
88,032
765,782
819,558
38,854
163,795
166,347
352,206
137,105
320,388
137,740
15,288
100,978
45,874
374,530
219,050
111,055
5,297,878
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$571,516
79,076
687,870
736,175
34,901
147,130
149,423
316,372
123,156
287,792
123,726
13,733
90,704
41,207
336,424
196,764
99,757
4,758,864
$636,249
88,032
765,782
819,558
38,854
163,795
166,347
352,206
137,105
320,388
137,740
15,288
100,978
45,874
374,530
219,050
111,055
5,297,878
Subtotal ......................................................................................
8,794,588
9,790,710
0
8,794,588
9,790,710
Review and Modify HIIPP—Existing Plan in Place
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
Subtotal ......................................................................................
602,197
71,235
640,861
1,869,454
30,363
127,030
134,784
862,318
104,531
256,231
111,630
12,418
81,702
36,857
348,769
172,636
89,576
645,831
670,405
79,303
713,448
2,081,199
33,802
141,418
150,051
959,989
116,371
285,253
124,274
13,825
90,956
41,032
388,272
192,190
99,722
718,981
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
602,197
71,235
640,861
1,869,454
30,363
127,030
134,784
862,318
104,531
256,231
111,630
12,418
81,702
36,857
348,769
172,636
89,576
645,831
670,405
79,303
713,448
2,081,199
33,802
141,418
150,051
959,989
116,371
285,253
124,274
13,825
90,956
41,032
388,272
192,190
99,722
718,981
6,198,424
6,900,490
0
6,198,424
6,900,490
1,145,248
158,458
1,378,407
1,475,204
69,938
294,830
299,425
633,971
246,789
576,699
247,932
27,519
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,028,729
142,336
1,238,166
1,325,114
62,822
264,834
268,961
569,469
221,681
518,025
222,707
24,719
1,145,248
158,458
1,378,407
1,475,204
69,938
294,830
299,425
633,971
246,789
576,699
247,932
27,519
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Use HIIPP Template
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
77 The percentage of establishments overall that
will choose to write a HIIPP from scratch as
reported in section VIII.C.IV.B. is estimated using
these assumptions. The percentage of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
1,028,729
142,336
1,238,166
1,325,114
62,822
264,834
268,961
569,469
221,681
518,025
222,707
24,719
establishments choosing to write the HIIPP from
scratch is equal to the estimated percentage of
establishments without an existing HIIPP (50
percent) multiplied by the percentage of
PO 00000
Frm 00162
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
establishments without a HIIPP that will write from
scratch (10 percent), resulting in an estimate of 5
percent.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70859
TABLE VIII.C.22—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
163,268
74,172
605,564
354,175
179,562
8,565,954
181,761
82,574
674,153
394,291
199,900
9,536,180
0
0
0
0
0
0
163,268
74,172
605,564
354,175
179,562
8,565,954
181,761
82,574
674,153
394,291
199,900
9,536,180
Subtotal ......................................................................................
15,830,259
17,623,278
0
15,830,259
17,623,278
No Written HIIPP
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
384,875
197,485
1,441,614
16,325,441
240,566
971,555
1,628,310
1,888,694
390,715
117,737
519,705
39,269
40,508
48,969
2,339,927
155,752
69,627
12,929,181
428,468
219,853
1,604,899
18,174,547
267,814
1,081,599
1,812,741
2,102,618
434,970
131,073
578,570
43,717
45,096
54,515
2,604,960
173,394
77,514
14,393,608
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
384,875
197,485
1,441,614
16,325,441
240,566
971,555
1,628,310
1,888,694
390,715
117,737
519,705
39,269
40,508
48,969
2,339,927
155,752
69,627
12,929,181
428,468
219,853
1,604,899
18,174,547
267,814
1,081,599
1,812,741
2,102,618
434,970
131,073
578,570
43,717
45,096
54,515
2,604,960
173,394
77,514
14,393,608
Subtotal ......................................................................................
39,729,931
44,229,952
0
39,729,931
44,229,952
HIIPP Development Involvement—Employee
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
851,195
192,469
1,817,682
9,833,544
158,699
576,337
965,955
1,450,926
304,839
375,365
354,289
28,608
142,022
60,166
1,378,241
418,672
142,480
10,068,354
947,606
214,269
2,023,562
10,947,344
176,674
641,616
1,075,364
1,615,265
339,367
417,881
394,418
31,849
158,108
66,981
1,534,347
466,093
158,618
11,208,749
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
851,195
192,469
1,817,682
9,833,544
158,699
576,337
965,955
1,450,926
304,839
375,365
354,289
28,608
142,022
60,166
1,378,241
418,672
142,480
10,068,354
947,606
214,269
2,023,562
10,947,344
176,674
641,616
1,075,364
1,615,265
339,367
417,881
394,418
31,849
158,108
66,981
1,534,347
466,093
158,618
11,208,749
Subtotal ......................................................................................
29,119,844
32,418,111
0
29,119,844
32,418,111
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Review and Update HIIPP
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,638,013
521,118
4,230,189
25,372,668
419,603
1,713,720
2,553,994
4,612,791
902,716
1,139,285
1,079,103
96,811
365,212
203,603
4,183,154
867,903
432,448
25,384,577
2,638,013
521,118
4,230,189
25,372,668
419,603
1,713,720
2,553,994
4,612,791
902,716
1,139,285
1,079,103
96,811
365,212
203,603
4,183,154
867,903
432,448
25,384,577
2,638,013
521,118
4,230,189
25,372,668
419,603
1,713,720
2,553,994
4,612,791
902,716
1,139,285
1,079,103
96,811
365,212
203,603
4,183,154
867,903
432,448
25,384,577
Subtotal ......................................................................................
0
0
76,716,909
76,716,909
76,716,909
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00163
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70860
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.22—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PLAN—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
HIIPP Review and Update Involvement—Employee
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,837,318
641,563
6,058,940
32,778,482
528,998
1,921,123
3,219,849
4,836,419
1,016,130
1,251,217
1,180,963
95,362
473,407
200,554
4,594,136
1,395,573
474,934
33,561,180
2,837,318
641,563
6,058,940
32,778,482
528,998
1,921,123
3,219,849
4,836,419
1,016,130
1,251,217
1,180,963
95,362
473,407
200,554
4,594,136
1,395,573
474,934
33,561,180
2,837,318
641,563
6,058,940
32,778,482
528,998
1,921,123
3,219,849
4,836,419
1,016,130
1,251,217
1,180,963
95,362
473,407
200,554
4,594,136
1,395,573
474,934
33,561,180
Subtotal ......................................................................................
0
0
97,066,147
97,066,147
97,066,147
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .....................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ....................................
Commercial Kitchens ........................................................................
Construction ......................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...........................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..................................................
Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................................................
Oil and Gas .......................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ............................................................
Recreation and Amusement .............................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ........................................................
Telecommunications .........................................................................
Temporary Help Services .................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................
Utilities ...............................................................................................
Warehousing .....................................................................................
Non-Core ...........................................................................................
3,438,511
682,600
5,826,193
30,089,729
527,352
2,086,886
3,147,433
5,087,780
1,144,922
1,555,149
1,332,058
118,748
518,204
261,372
5,008,925
1,297,999
581,002
36,968,184
3,827,975
759,915
6,486,098
33,497,850
587,083
2,323,258
3,503,928
5,664,048
1,274,601
1,731,294
1,482,934
132,198
576,898
290,976
5,576,262
1,445,017
646,809
41,155,395
5,475,331
1,162,682
10,289,129
58,151,149
948,600
3,634,843
5,773,844
9,449,210
1,918,846
2,390,502
2,260,066
192,173
838,619
404,158
8,777,289
2,263,476
907,382
58,945,757
8,913,842
1,845,282
16,115,322
88,240,878
1,475,952
5,721,729
8,921,277
14,536,989
3,063,767
3,945,651
3,592,124
310,921
1,356,823
665,530
13,786,214
3,561,475
1,488,384
95,913,940
9,303,306
1,922,597
16,775,228
91,649,000
1,535,683
5,958,101
9,277,772
15,113,258
3,193,447
4,121,796
3,743,000
324,371
1,415,518
695,134
14,353,551
3,708,493
1,554,191
100,101,152
Total ...........................................................................................
99,673,046
110,962,542
173,783,056
273,456,102
284,745,597
Total
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Identifying Heat Hazards
Establishments would be expected to
monitor environmental conditions in
and around work areas under the
proposed standard for both indoor and
outdoor work sites. As outlined in
section VIII.C.IV.C., establishments with
outdoor work sites could track local
forecasts to meet this requirement,
while establishments with indoor work
sites are assumed to use temperature
and data loggers to monitor
environmental conditions. For this
analysis, OSHA assumes one work area
per establishment. OSHA estimates the
number of establishments with outdoor
and indoor work areas by estimating the
percentage of employees in each
industry that are estimated as indoor
and outdoor employees affected by the
proposed standard. OSHA multiplies
the total number of affected
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
establishments by the percentages of
indoor and outdoor employees to
determine the number of indoor and
outdoor establishments and then
multiplies these counts of indoor and
outdoor establishments by their
respective unit costs for indoor and
outdoor environmental monitoring
(with the unit costs for outdoor
establishments being lower than for
indoor establishments).
Indoor establishments would also
need to identify work areas that pose
heat-related risks to employees. OSHA
assumes that 20 percent of
establishments will need to reevaluate
work areas due to changes to work
processes that may result in increased
heat-related exposure for employees
every year. OSHA therefore has
estimated that this indoor work area
evaluation would be incurred every five
years at each establishment. Similar to
PO 00000
Frm 00164
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the development and review of the
HIIPP, the proposed standard would
require employee involvement in these
work-area evaluations. OSHA again
assumes that four employees per
establishment would make up a
representative sample of employees that
could provide input. Since these workarea evaluations are expected to occur
every five years, OSHA assumed that
the cost for these work-area evaluations
would occur in the first and sixth years
after the proposed standard’s
implementation. OSHA determined the
present value of these costs using a 2
percent discount rate. Once adjusted for
compliance, OSHA annualized the
present value of these costs for
inclusion in the total annualized costs
for this provision.
Table VIII.C.23. shows the annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category, discounted (2 percent
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70861
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
over a 10-year period) and
undiscounted.
TABLE VIII.C.23—TOTAL COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Periodic costs annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
0%
2%
Outdoor Environmental Monitoring
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$1,375,617
158,176
281,211
10,052,936
80,978
1,064,766
899,249
531,117
496,105
437,122
485,898
40,070
156,702
53,412
1,701,945
404,225
99,663
8,653,930
$1,375,617
158,176
281,211
10,052,936
80,978
1,064,766
899,249
531,117
496,105
437,122
485,898
40,070
156,702
53,412
1,701,945
404,225
99,663
8,653,930
$1,375,617
158,176
281,211
10,052,936
80,978
1,064,766
899,249
531,117
496,105
437,122
485,898
40,070
156,702
53,412
1,701,945
404,225
99,663
8,653,930
Subtotal ..................................................
0
0
0
0
26,973,121
26,973,121
26,973,121
Indoor Environmental Monitoring
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,185,108
2,683,488
30,781,175
22,515,231
2,699,251
4,713,180
11,923,927
10,319,923
2,870,853
4,943,180
3,895,764
386,155
1,423,714
1,134,702
14,040,680
3,101,788
2,565,146
215,676,858
5,185,108
2,683,488
30,781,175
22,515,231
2,699,251
4,713,180
11,923,927
10,319,923
2,870,853
4,943,180
3,895,764
386,155
1,423,714
1,134,702
14,040,680
3,101,788
2,565,146
215,676,858
5,185,108
2,683,488
30,781,175
22,515,231
2,699,251
4,713,180
11,923,927
10,319,923
2,870,853
4,943,180
3,895,764
386,155
1,423,714
1,134,702
14,040,680
3,101,788
2,565,146
215,676,858
Subtotal ..................................................
0
0
0
0
340,860,123
340,860,123
340,860,123
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Indoor Identification of Heat-Exposed Work Areas
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
434,176
196,825
2,237,077
969,517
193,662
339,167
873,563
352,835
201,310
362,718
288,093
28,493
104,314
83,063
1,134,479
167,121
186,866
15,801,702
451,540
204,696
2,326,542
1,008,290
201,407
352,731
908,498
366,946
209,361
377,224
299,614
29,633
108,485
86,385
1,179,850
173,804
194,339
16,433,646
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
434,176
196,825
2,237,077
969,517
193,662
339,167
873,563
352,835
201,310
362,718
288,093
28,493
104,314
83,063
1,134,479
167,121
186,866
15,801,702
451,540
204,696
2,326,542
1,008,290
201,407
352,731
908,498
366,946
209,361
377,224
299,614
29,633
108,485
86,385
1,179,850
173,804
194,339
16,433,646
Subtotal ..................................................
0
0
23,954,982
24,912,993
0
23,954,982
24,912,993
121,414
62,963
867,865
1,741,404
63,479
0
0
0
0
0
116,745
60,542
834,492
1,674,440
61,038
121,414
62,963
867,865
1,741,404
63,479
Work Area Evaluation—Employee
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0
0
0
0
0
I
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00165
0
0
0
0
0
I
Fmt 4701
116,745
60,542
834,492
1,674,440
61,038
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70862
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.23—TOTAL COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Periodic costs annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
0%
2%
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95,514
275,328
601,334
56,627
99,588
78,775
7,017
33,804
20,455
311,485
90,893
51,306
2,926,926
99,334
286,338
625,383
58,892
103,571
81,925
7,297
35,156
21,273
323,942
94,528
53,358
3,043,980
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95,514
275,328
601,334
56,627
99,588
78,775
7,017
33,804
20,455
311,485
90,893
51,306
2,926,926
99,334
286,338
625,383
58,892
103,571
81,925
7,297
35,156
21,273
323,942
94,528
53,358
3,043,980
Subtotal ..................................................
0
0
7,396,309
7,692,103
0
7,396,309
7,692,103
Monitoring Equipment—Indoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
118,862
57,453
1,048,813
362,081
56,623
97,542
250,133
168,477
41,489
93,192
96,716
7,882
18,319
23,160
264,703
37,716
48,360
4,048,215
132,325
63,961
1,167,608
403,092
63,037
108,590
278,465
187,560
46,189
103,747
107,670
8,774
20,394
25,783
294,685
41,988
53,837
4,506,737
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
118,862
57,453
1,048,813
362,081
56,623
97,542
250,133
168,477
41,489
93,192
96,716
7,882
18,319
23,160
264,703
37,716
48,360
4,048,215
132,325
63,961
1,167,608
403,092
63,037
108,590
278,465
187,560
46,189
103,747
107,670
8,774
20,394
25,783
294,685
41,988
53,837
4,506,737
Subtotal ..................................................
6,839,737
7,614,442
0
0
0
6,839,737
7,614,442
Review Monitoring Equipment User Manual—Indoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
5,992
3,096
36,379
60,102
3,115
5,921
13,758
29,769
3,383
5,704
4,495
446
1,643
1,309
16,201
3,579
2,960
139,235
6,671
3,447
40,499
66,909
3,467
6,592
15,317
33,141
3,766
6,350
5,004
496
1,829
1,458
18,036
3,984
3,295
155,005
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,992
3,096
36,379
60,102
3,115
5,921
13,758
29,769
3,383
5,704
4,495
446
1,643
1,309
16,201
3,579
2,960
139,235
6,671
3,447
40,499
66,909
3,467
6,592
15,317
33,141
3,766
6,350
5,004
496
1,829
1,458
18,036
3,984
3,295
155,005
Subtotal ..................................................
337,086
375,266
0
0
0
337,086
375,266
550,921
257,367
3,071,569
2,643,957
254,700
434,682
1,148,890
954,170
257,938
462,306
366,868
35,510
138,118
103,518
1,445,964
572,954
267,659
3,194,407
2,749,695
264,886
452,065
1,194,837
992,329
268,253
480,795
381,540
36,930
143,641
107,658
1,503,791
6,560,724
2,841,664
31,062,385
32,568,167
2,780,229
5,777,946
12,823,176
10,851,040
3,366,958
5,380,302
4,381,662
426,225
1,580,416
1,188,114
15,742,625
7,236,500
3,159,581
35,219,146
35,634,308
3,094,667
6,316,091
14,235,958
12,003,456
3,669,768
5,941,504
4,849,741
470,062
1,738,495
1,316,102
17,469,493
7,272,674
3,176,732
35,464,900
35,787,864
3,111,620
6,345,193
14,311,794
12,064,070
3,685,166
5,971,194
4,875,876
472,425
1,746,280
1,323,013
17,559,137
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Commercial Kitchens ....................................
Construction ..................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries .......
Landscaping and Facilities Support ..............
Maintenance and Repair ...............................
Manufacturing ................................................
Oil and Gas ...................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ........................
Recreation and Amusement .........................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ....................
Telecommunications .....................................
Temporary Help Services .............................
Transportation ...............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
124,854
60,550
1,085,192
422,183
59,738
103,463
263,892
198,246
44,873
98,895
101,211
8,327
19,962
24,469
280,904
PO 00000
138,996
67,408
1,208,107
470,002
66,504
115,182
293,782
220,701
49,955
110,097
112,674
9,270
22,223
27,241
312,721
Frm 00166
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70863
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.23—TOTAL COSTS—IDENTIFYING HEAT HAZARDS—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Periodic costs annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
0%
2%
Utilities ...........................................................
Warehousing .................................................
Non-Core .......................................................
41,295
51,319
4,187,450
45,972
57,132
4,661,742
258,014
238,172
18,728,628
268,332
247,697
19,477,626
3,506,013
2,664,809
224,330,788
3,805,322
2,954,301
247,246,865
3,820,318
2,969,638
248,470,156
Total .......................................................
7,176,823
7,989,707
31,351,291
32,605,096
367,833,244
406,361,358
408,428,047
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
D. Requirements at or Above the Initial
Heat Trigger
I. Drinking Water
All affected establishments would be
required to provide sufficiently cool
water to their affected employees. In
order to meet this requirement, OSHA
assumes that establishments would
purchase one 40-quart cooler for every
40 employees. These establishments
would also purchase reusable water
bottles for each affected employee.
II. Break Area(s) at Outdoor Work Sites
All affected establishments would
also have to provide break areas for
affected employees. At establishments
with outdoor work sites, OSHA assumes
that each establishment would purchase
a twelve-by-twelve-foot tent as a means
of providing artificial shade. OSHA
assumes that establishments would
incur this cost one time.
III. Break Area(s) and Work Area(s) at
Indoor Work Sites
Establishments with indoor work sites
would purchase one industrial pedestal
fan and one dehumidifier that provide
sufficient air movement and humidity
control in break areas for every 10
employees. Establishments with indoor
work sites would also have to purchase
these same control measures for work
areas for every 10 employees. However,
OSHA does not capture a cost for
dehumidifiers for establishments with
indoor work sites in the four least
humid States in the U.S. (Arizona,
Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Acclimatization
Both new and returning employees
would undergo acclimatization during
their first week of work when the initial
heat trigger is met or exceeded during
that first week. To calculate
acclimatization costs, OSHA multiplied
the unit costs for acclimatization shown
in section VIII.C.IV.D.IV., by the number
of new employees and by the number of
returning employees. OSHA calculates
the number of new employees using
BLS’ Job Openings and Labor Turnover
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Survey (JOLTS) (BLS JOLTS, 2024).
OSHA used the JOLTS hire rates from
June through August for 2023 by sector
to represent the percentage of
employees that are new and join their
respective employers when the initial
heat trigger is met or exceeded. OSHA
lacks data that would allow further
refinement of this estimate. Calculating
the number of new employees based on
those hired in June through August may
not accurately represent the universe of
employees who will need
acclimatization. This assumption may
underestimate the number of newly
hired employees in areas where the heat
season is longer but might overestimate
the number in areas where the weather
is cooler for more of the year. OSHA
also heard from Small Entity
Representatives during the SBAR Panel
process that they purposefully avoid
hiring new employees during times
when temperatures are high in order to
avoid the difficulties and costs of
acclimatization. Therefore, again, using
the JOLTS data for this timeframe may
overstate the number of employees who
will need acclimatization. OSHA also
applies this assumption to employees
working indoors in settings without
adequate climate control but, as
discussed above in section VIII.C.II.C.,
acknowledges that this assumption that
outdoor heat translates to indoor heat
may over- or understate the
temperatures indoors. The agency
welcomes comment on this estimate as
well as data that would allow this
parameter to be better estimated.
To calculate the number of returning
employees, OSHA assumed that two
percent of all employees not newly
hired would qualify as returning
employees (i.e., those returning to work
from an absence of more than 14 days
during a time when the initial or high
heat trigger are met). OSHA welcomes
comment on this estimate and
information or data sources that might
better allow the agency to identify
employees returning from absences of
more than 14 days. Next, OSHA
multiplied the two percent by one
minus the annual hire rate according to
PO 00000
Frm 00167
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the JOLTS data by sector. OSHA then
multiplied this product by the ratio of
the summer hire rate to annual hire rate
to arrive at the percentage of employees
returning to work when the initial heat
trigger is met or exceeded during their
first week back.
V. Rest Breaks if Needed
To calculate the cost for if-needed rest
breaks when the initial heat trigger is
met or exceeded, OSHA first calculated
the number of rest breaks that affected
employees would be expected to take
annually. OSHA used the number of
work hours in a given State for each
work shift type (daytime, evening, and
overnight) that met or exceeded the
initial heat trigger but did not meet or
exceed the high heat trigger. The
estimated number of hours was then
normalized to 8-hour work shift
equivalents by dividing the number of
hours meeting or exceeding the initial
heat trigger (but not meeting the high
heat trigger) by eight.78 OSHA then
multiplied these 8-hour work shift
equivalents, the number of affected
employees, and the corresponding unit
costs for rest breaks for indoor and
outdoor employees as shown in section
VIII.C.IV.D.V. to determine total costs
for rest breaks at the initial heat trigger.
As discussed in section VIII.C.IV.D.V.
and detailed further in appendix A at
the end of this section, OSHA estimates
that under the proposed standard, the
reduction in time spent on pacing (i.e.,
the increase in worker efficiency) will
partially offset the added cost of time
78 By assuming full, 8-hour work shifts at or above
the heat trigger(s), this methodology may overstate
the number of breaks employers need to provide
since there may be some days where the heat
triggers are met or exceeded but for shorter periods
of time. For example, if the high heat trigger is met
or exceeded for less than two hours, the
requirement to provide a scheduled rest break
would not be triggered. Additionally, employees
exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger
for shorter periods of time are likely to need fewer
if-needed rest breaks. A scheduled lunch break in
the middle of the day may also be sufficient to
satisfy the break requirement on days when the
high heat trigger is met for only a portion of the day.
OSHA welcomes comment on this methodology
and recommendations on alternative approaches.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70864
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
spent on if-needed rest breaks when the
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded for
employees in Group 1 (i.e., currently
noncompliant with if-needed rest breaks
as well as scheduled rest breaks), by 20
percent and 23.33 percent for outdoor
and indoor employees, respectively.
Combining this estimated partial offset
of the unit cost of if-needed rest breaks
as required by the proposed standard
with data on the industry-level and/or
State-level number of in-scope
employees (discussed in Section VIII.B.,
Profile of Affected Industries), baseline
non-compliance rates (discussed in
section VIII.C.II.A.), and State-level
exposure to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger (discussed in section
VIII.C.II.C.), OSHA estimates that
approximately 21.78 percent of the total
cost of compliance with if-needed rest
breaks when the initial heat trigger is
met or exceeded (approximately $0.0875
billion out of $0.402 billion) could be
offset by avoided labor productivity
losses due to pacing (i.e., avoided losses
in worker efficiency).
VI. Effective Communication
Employers would also be required to
effectively communicate with affected
employees when the initial heat trigger
is met or exceeded. OSHA first
calculated the number of times a
designated person would have to
perform this duty by estimating the
number of hours annually that meet or
exceed the initial heat trigger for each
State. OSHA then normalized these
estimates to reflect 8-hour work shift
equivalents. These 8-hour work shift
equivalents are then multiplied by the
number of affected employees and the
unit costs as shown in Section
VIII.C.IV.D.VI., Effective
Communication, of 15 seconds every
two hours of both a designated person’s
and at-risk employee’s time.
Table VIII.C.24. shows the annualized
one-time, annual, and total annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category and region,
discounted (2 percent over a 10-year
period) and undiscounted.
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Coolers with Spigot
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
$15
1,822
1,294
13
1,941
447
$16
2,028
1,441
15
2,161
498
$0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
0
$15
1,822
1,294
13
1,941
447
$16
2,028
1,441
15
2,161
498
5,532
6,158
0
0
5,532
6,158
23
2,115
2,627
41
2,456
1,497
25
2,355
2,925
45
2,734
1,667
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
2,115
2,627
41
2,456
1,497
25
2,355
2,925
45
2,734
1,667
8,759
9,751
0
0
8,759
9,751
125
14,789
22,011
476
19,755
12,343
140
16,465
24,504
530
21,993
13,741
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
125
14,789
22,011
476
19,755
12,343
140
16,465
24,504
530
21,993
13,741
0
77,372
0
0
69,500
77,372
235
17,355
25,296
499
65,874
18,599
262
19,321
28,161
556
73,335
20,706
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
235
17,355
25,296
499
65,874
18,599
262
19,321
28,161
556
73,335
20,706
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
127,859
142,341
0
0
127,859
142,341
2
277
508
11
401
249
3
309
566
12
446
277
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
277
508
11
401
249
3
309
566
12
446
277
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,448
1,612
0
0
1,448
1,612
87
5,475
8,862
171
7,341
20,404
96
6,095
9,865
191
8,173
22,716
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
87
5,475
8,862
171
7,341
20,404
96
6,095
9,865
191
8,173
22,716
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00168
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70865
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
42,340
47,136
0
0
42,340
47,136
26
2,866
3,702
45
3,449
2,148
29
3,190
4,121
50
3,839
2,391
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
2,866
3,702
45
3,449
2,148
29
3,190
4,121
50
3,839
2,391
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
12,235
13,621
0
0
12,235
13,621
70
22,988
21,278
65
17,040
11,035
78
25,592
23,688
72
18,970
12,284
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
22,988
21,278
65
17,040
11,035
78
25,592
23,688
72
18,970
12,284
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
72,475
80,684
0
0
72,475
80,684
76
554
362
3,468
725
85
617
403
3,861
807
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
76
554
362
3,468
725
85
617
403
3,861
807
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
5,185
5,772
0
0
5,185
5,772
5
974
1,556
16
1,104
776
6
1,084
1,732
17
1,229
864
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
974
1,556
16
1,104
776
6
1,084
1,732
17
1,229
864
4,431
4,933
0
0
4,431
4,933
23
2,358
3,928
51
3,076
2,314
26
2,625
4,373
57
3,425
2,576
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
2,358
3,928
51
3,076
2,314
26
2,625
4,373
57
3,425
2,576
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
11,750
13,081
0
0
11,750
13,081
14
427
723
13
577
347
15
476
805
14
642
386
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
427
723
13
577
347
15
476
805
14
642
386
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,101
2,339
0
0
2,101
2,339
12
641
973
12
884
453
14
713
1,083
13
984
505
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
641
973
12
884
453
14
713
1,083
13
984
505
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,975
3,312
0
0
2,975
3,312
7
6,812
8,706
204
14,093
7,054
8
7,583
9,692
228
15,689
7,853
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
6,812
8,706
204
14,093
7,054
8
7,583
9,692
228
15,689
7,853
36,877
41,053
0
0
36,877
41,053
99
4,282
4,364
147
5,809
1,895
110
4,768
4,859
163
6,467
2,110
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99
4,282
4,364
147
5,809
1,895
110
4,768
4,859
163
6,467
2,110
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00169
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70866
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
16,597
18,477
0
0
16,597
18,477
16
1,233
1,725
7
1,477
683
18
1,373
1,921
7
1,644
760
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
1,233
1,725
7
1,477
683
18
1,373
1,921
7
1,644
760
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
5,141
5,723
0
0
5,141
5,723
3
1,489
2,181
9
1,846
1,211
3
1,658
2,428
10
2,055
1,348
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1,489
2,181
9
1,846
1,211
3
1,658
2,428
10
2,055
1,348
6,738
7,502
0
0
6,738
7,502
837
68,086
112,634
1,673
62,705
61,070
932
75,798
125,392
1,862
69,807
67,987
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
837
68,086
112,634
1,673
62,705
61,070
932
75,798
125,392
1,862
69,807
67,987
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Coolers with Spigot:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
307,005
341,778
0
0
307,005
341,778
1,676
154,543
222,731
3,453
213,294
143,251
1,866
172,047
247,959
3,844
237,453
159,476
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,676
154,543
222,731
3,453
213,294
143,251
1,866
172,047
247,959
3,844
237,453
159,476
Total ................................................................
738,948
822,646
0
0
738,948
822,646
Reusable Water Bottle
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
4
537
382
4
573
132
5
598
425
4
637
147
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
537
382
4
573
132
5
598
425
4
637
147
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,632
1,817
0
0
1,632
1,817
7
624
775
12
725
442
7
695
863
13
807
492
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
624
775
12
725
442
7
695
863
13
807
492
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,584
2,877
0
0
2,584
2,877
37
4,363
6,494
141
5,829
3,642
41
4,858
7,229
156
6,489
4,054
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
37
4,363
6,494
141
5,829
3,642
41
4,858
7,229
156
6,489
4,054
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
20,505
22,828
0
0
20,505
22,828
69
5,120
7,463
147
19,435
5,487
77
5,700
8,309
164
21,636
6,109
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
69
5,120
7,463
147
19,435
5,487
77
5,700
8,309
164
21,636
6,109
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
37,723
41,996
0
0
37,723
41,996
1
82
1
91
0
0
0
0
1
82
1
91
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00170
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70867
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
150
3
118
73
167
4
132
82
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
150
3
118
73
167
4
132
82
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
427
476
0
0
427
476
26
1,615
2,615
51
2,166
6,020
28
1,798
2,911
56
2,411
6,702
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
1,615
2,615
51
2,166
6,020
28
1,798
2,911
56
2,411
6,702
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
12,492
13,907
0
0
12,492
13,907
8
846
1,092
13
1,017
634
8
941
1,216
15
1,133
705
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
846
1,092
13
1,017
634
8
941
1,216
15
1,133
705
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
3,610
4,019
0
0
3,610
4,019
21
6,782
6,278
19
5,027
3,256
23
7,550
6,989
21
5,597
3,624
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
6,782
6,278
19
5,027
3,256
23
7,550
6,989
21
5,597
3,624
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
21,383
23,805
0
0
21,383
23,805
22
163
107
1,023
214
25
182
119
1,139
238
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
163
107
1,023
214
25
182
119
1,139
238
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,530
1,703
0
0
1,530
1,703
2
287
459
5
326
229
2
320
511
5
363
255
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
287
459
5
326
229
2
320
511
5
363
255
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,307
1,455
0
0
1,307
1,455
7
696
1,159
15
908
683
8
774
1,290
17
1,010
760
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
696
1,159
15
908
683
8
774
1,290
17
1,010
760
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
3,467
3,859
0
0
3,467
3,859
4
126
213
4
170
102
5
140
238
4
189
114
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
126
213
4
170
102
5
140
238
4
189
114
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
620
690
0
0
620
690
4
189
287
3
261
134
4
210
320
4
290
149
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
189
287
3
261
134
4
210
320
4
290
149
878
977
0
0
878
977
2
2
0
0
2
2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00171
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70868
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,010
2,568
60
4,158
2,081
2,237
2,859
67
4,629
2,317
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,010
2,568
60
4,158
2,081
2,237
2,859
67
4,629
2,317
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
10,880
12,112
0
0
10,880
12,112
29
1,263
1,288
43
1,714
559
33
1,407
1,434
48
1,908
622
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
1,263
1,288
43
1,714
559
33
1,407
1,434
48
1,908
622
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
4,897
5,451
0
0
4,897
5,451
5
364
509
2
436
202
5
405
567
2
485
224
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
364
509
2
436
202
5
405
567
2
485
224
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,517
1,689
0
0
1,517
1,689
1
439
643
3
545
357
1
489
716
3
606
398
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
439
643
3
545
357
1
489
716
3
606
398
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,988
2,213
0
0
1,988
2,213
247
20,088
33,231
494
18,500
18,018
275
22,363
36,995
549
20,596
20,059
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
247
20,088
33,231
494
18,500
18,018
275
22,363
36,995
549
20,596
20,059
90,578
100,837
0
0
90,578
100,837
494
45,596
65,714
1,019
62,930
42,264
550
50,760
73,157
1,134
70,057
47,051
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
494
45,596
65,714
1,019
62,930
42,264
550
50,760
73,157
1,134
70,057
47,051
218,017
242,711
0
0
218,017
242,711
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Reusable Water Bottle:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total ................................................................
Outdoor Break Area Engineering Control
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,139
148,614
82,148
1,094
141,834
34,464
2,381
165,447
91,452
1,218
157,899
38,367
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,139
148,614
82,148
1,094
141,834
34,464
2,381
165,447
91,452
1,218
157,899
38,367
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
410,292
456,764
0
0
410,292
456,764
113
8,748
12,576
209
11,796
7,958
126
9,738
14,001
233
13,133
8,859
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
113
8,748
12,576
209
11,796
7,958
126
9,738
14,001
233
13,133
8,859
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
41,401
46,090
0
0
41,401
46,090
319
24,910
39,778
766
28,473
355
27,731
44,284
853
31,698
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
319
24,910
39,778
766
28,473
355
27,731
44,284
853
31,698
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00172
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70869
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Western ..................................................................
22,781
25,361
0
0
22,781
25,361
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
117,026
130,281
0
0
117,026
130,281
4,131
265,524
385,284
5,698
278,496
116,376
4,599
295,599
428,923
6,343
310,040
129,557
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,131
265,524
385,284
5,698
278,496
116,376
4,599
295,599
428,923
6,343
310,040
129,557
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,055,509
1,175,062
0
0
1,055,509
1,175,062
28
3,440
8,838
70
5,216
3,579
31
3,830
9,839
77
5,806
3,984
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
3,440
8,838
70
5,216
3,579
31
3,830
9,839
77
5,806
3,984
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
21,170
23,567
0
0
21,170
23,567
500
53,460
86,844
1,227
60,819
49,560
556
59,515
96,680
1,366
67,707
55,173
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500
53,460
86,844
1,227
60,819
49,560
556
59,515
96,680
1,366
67,707
55,173
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
252,409
280,998
0
0
252,409
280,998
553
56,502
75,259
903
60,866
44,596
616
62,902
83,783
1,005
67,760
49,647
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
553
56,502
75,259
903
60,866
44,596
616
62,902
83,783
1,005
67,760
49,647
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
238,677
265,711
0
0
238,677
265,711
109
13,706
16,157
138
12,473
10,469
121
15,258
17,987
153
13,886
11,655
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
109
13,706
16,157
138
12,473
10,469
121
15,258
17,987
153
13,886
11,655
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
53,053
59,062
0
0
53,053
59,062
371
14,887
7,969
54,268
7,404
413
16,573
8,871
60,415
8,243
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
371
14,887
7,969
54,268
7,404
413
16,573
8,871
60,415
8,243
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
84,899
94,515
0
0
84,899
94,515
660
28,109
35,229
367
25,444
14,637
735
31,293
39,219
409
28,325
16,294
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
660
28,109
35,229
367
25,444
14,637
735
31,293
39,219
409
28,325
16,294
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
104,446
116,276
0
0
104,446
116,276
911
35,982
53,826
666
35,056
27,649
1,014
40,057
59,922
741
39,027
30,780
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
911
35,982
53,826
666
35,056
27,649
1,014
40,057
59,922
741
39,027
30,780
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
154,089
171,542
0
0
154,089
171,542
75
2,469
3,594
56
83
2,749
4,001
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
2,469
3,594
56
83
2,749
4,001
62
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00173
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70870
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,609
1,605
2,905
1,787
0
0
0
0
2,609
1,605
2,905
1,787
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
10,408
11,587
0
0
10,408
11,587
96
5,824
7,971
87
7,002
4,503
107
6,483
8,874
97
7,795
5,013
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
96
5,824
7,971
87
7,002
4,503
107
6,483
8,874
97
7,795
5,013
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
25,482
28,368
0
0
25,482
28,368
16
3,116
4,390
42
3,728
2,499
18
3,469
4,888
47
4,150
2,782
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
3,116
4,390
42
3,728
2,499
18
3,469
4,888
47
4,150
2,782
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
13,791
15,353
0
0
13,791
15,353
2,163
130,909
116,569
1,448
118,579
40,067
2,408
145,737
129,772
1,612
132,010
44,605
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,163
130,909
116,569
1,448
118,579
40,067
2,408
145,737
129,772
1,612
132,010
44,605
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
409,735
456,144
0
0
409,735
456,144
333
14,246
17,850
121
19,989
9,235
370
15,860
19,872
135
22,253
10,281
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
333
14,246
17,850
121
19,989
9,235
370
15,860
19,872
135
22,253
10,281
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
61,775
68,772
0
0
61,775
68,772
37
5,364
6,782
86
6,658
4,713
41
5,971
7,550
96
7,412
5,247
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
37
5,364
6,782
86
6,658
4,713
41
5,971
7,550
96
7,412
5,247
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
23,639
26,317
0
0
23,639
26,317
10,666
771,392
1,203,522
19,907
938,300
697,582
11,875
858,764
1,339,839
22,161
1,044,577
776,594
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10,666
771,392
1,203,522
19,907
938,300
697,582
11,875
858,764
1,339,839
22,161
1,044,577
776,594
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Outdoor Break Area Engineering Control:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
3,641,370
4,053,811
0
0
3,641,370
4,053,811
23,219
1,587,201
2,164,586
32,884
1,811,607
1,099,676
25,849
1,766,975
2,409,758
36,608
2,016,799
1,224,231
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23,219
1,587,201
2,164,586
32,884
1,811,607
1,099,676
25,849
1,766,975
2,409,758
36,608
2,016,799
1,224,231
Total ................................................................
6,719,171
7,480,220
0
0
6,719,171
7,480,220
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
329
108,158
60,978
639
90,405
154,877
366
120,408
67,885
711
100,644
172,419
Air Movement
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
329
108,158
60,978
639
90,405
154,877
Frm 00174
366
120,408
67,885
711
100,644
172,419
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70871
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2%
0%
2%
415,385
462,433
0
0
415,385
462,433
1,021
95,087
117,705
1,817
108,302
76,760
1,137
105,857
131,037
2,022
120,569
85,455
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,021
95,087
117,705
1,817
108,302
76,760
1,137
105,857
131,037
2,022
120,569
85,455
400,693
446,078
0
0
400,693
446,078
7,767
920,349
1,369,741
29,672
1,231,959
855,252
8,647
1,024,593
1,524,885
33,033
1,371,497
952,122
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,767
920,349
1,369,741
29,672
1,231,959
855,252
8,647
1,024,593
1,524,885
33,033
1,371,497
952,122
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
4,414,740
4,914,777
0
0
4,414,740
4,914,777
6,033
434,847
636,158
12,280
613,504
440,836
6,716
484,100
708,213
13,670
682,993
490,768
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,033
434,847
636,158
12,280
613,504
440,836
6,716
484,100
708,213
13,670
682,993
490,768
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,143,659
2,386,461
0
0
2,143,659
2,386,461
120
14,557
26,699
581
21,042
14,307
133
16,206
29,723
647
23,425
15,927
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
120
14,557
26,699
581
21,042
14,307
133
16,206
29,723
647
23,425
15,927
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
77,306
86,062
0
0
77,306
86,062
2,383
125,165
202,660
3,766
168,079
113,917
2,653
139,342
225,615
4,193
187,117
126,820
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,383
125,165
202,660
3,766
168,079
113,917
2,653
139,342
225,615
4,193
187,117
126,820
615,970
685,738
0
0
615,970
685,738
1,009
112,682
145,140
1,762
136,568
94,222
1,124
125,445
161,579
1,961
152,036
104,894
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,009
112,682
145,140
1,762
136,568
94,222
1,124
125,445
161,579
1,961
152,036
104,894
491,382
547,039
0
0
491,382
547,039
3,604
1,299,063
1,193,136
3,459
941,420
556,173
4,012
1,446,201
1,328,277
3,851
1,048,050
619,168
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,604
1,299,063
1,193,136
3,459
941,420
556,173
4,012
1,446,201
1,328,277
3,851
1,048,050
619,168
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
3,996,855
4,449,560
0
0
3,996,855
4,449,560
1,954
14,641
9,558
90,159
9,362
2,175
16,299
10,641
100,371
10,422
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,954
14,641
9,558
90,159
9,362
2,175
16,299
10,641
100,371
10,422
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
125,674
139,908
0
0
125,674
139,908
195
38,356
61,466
601
43,628
34,742
217
42,701
68,428
670
48,570
38,677
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
195
38,356
61,466
601
43,628
34,742
217
42,701
68,428
670
48,570
38,677
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00175
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70872
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
178,989
199,262
0
0
178,989
199,262
711
72,605
120,964
1,579
94,989
80,440
792
80,828
134,665
1,757
105,748
89,551
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
711
72,605
120,964
1,579
94,989
80,440
792
80,828
134,665
1,757
105,748
89,551
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
371,287
413,341
0
0
371,287
413,341
402
14,210
23,287
405
18,720
13,505
448
15,819
25,925
451
20,840
15,035
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
402
14,210
23,287
405
18,720
13,505
448
15,819
25,925
451
20,840
15,035
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
70,529
78,518
0
0
70,529
78,518
484
25,066
38,069
454
34,579
21,013
539
27,905
42,381
505
38,496
23,393
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
484
25,066
38,069
454
34,579
21,013
539
27,905
42,381
505
38,496
23,393
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
119,665
133,218
0
0
119,665
133,218
339
318,045
406,486
9,548
658,041
343,674
377
354,068
452,527
10,629
732,574
382,600
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
339
318,045
406,486
9,548
658,041
343,674
377
354,068
452,527
10,629
732,574
382,600
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,736,132
1,932,776
0
0
1,736,132
1,932,776
2,987
134,943
138,796
4,572
183,350
101,601
3,325
150,227
154,516
5,089
204,117
113,109
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,987
134,943
138,796
4,572
183,350
101,601
3,325
150,227
154,516
5,089
204,117
113,109
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
566,248
630,384
0
0
566,248
630,384
499
37,661
52,688
206
45,122
22,843
556
41,927
58,655
229
50,233
25,430
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
499
37,661
52,688
206
45,122
22,843
556
41,927
58,655
229
50,233
25,430
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
159,019
177,031
0
0
159,019
177,031
125
73,616
107,817
446
91,232
65,675
139
81,954
120,029
497
101,565
73,114
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
125
73,616
107,817
446
91,232
65,675
139
81,954
120,029
497
101,565
73,114
338,911
377,297
0
0
338,911
377,297
53,752
4,747,729
7,725,828
112,841
4,614,342
4,639,061
59,840
5,285,482
8,600,896
125,622
5,136,987
5,164,506
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
53,752
4,747,729
7,725,828
112,841
4,614,342
4,639,061
59,840
5,285,482
8,600,896
125,622
5,136,987
5,164,506
21,893,554
24,373,334
0
0
21,893,554
24,373,334
83,713
8,586,779
12,437,176
184,628
9,185,441
93,195
9,559,363
13,845,877
205,540
10,225,833
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
83,713
8,586,779
12,437,176
184,628
9,185,441
93,195
9,559,363
13,845,877
205,540
10,225,833
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Air Movement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00176
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70873
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Western ..................................................................
7,638,260
8,503,410
0
0
7,638,260
8,503,410
Total ................................................................
38,115,998
42,433,217
0
0
38,115,998
42,433,217
Humidity Control
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
95
31,400
17,703
185
25,671
42,556
106
34,957
19,708
206
28,578
47,376
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95
31,400
17,703
185
25,671
42,556
106
34,957
19,708
206
28,578
47,376
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
117,611
130,932
0
0
117,611
130,932
297
27,606
34,172
527
30,778
18,585
330
30,732
38,042
587
34,264
20,690
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
297
27,606
34,172
527
30,778
18,585
330
30,732
38,042
587
34,264
20,690
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
111,964
124,646
0
0
111,964
124,646
2,255
267,194
397,660
8,614
349,840
198,024
2,510
297,458
442,701
9,590
389,465
220,453
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,255
267,194
397,660
8,614
349,840
198,024
2,510
297,458
442,701
9,590
389,465
220,453
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,223,587
1,362,177
0
0
1,223,587
1,362,177
1,751
126,244
184,688
3,565
174,434
99,311
1,950
140,543
205,607
3,969
194,191
110,559
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,751
126,244
184,688
3,565
174,434
99,311
1,950
140,543
205,607
3,969
194,191
110,559
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
589,993
656,819
0
0
589,993
656,819
35
4,226
7,751
169
5,975
3,210
39
4,705
8,629
188
6,651
3,573
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
4,226
7,751
169
5,975
3,210
39
4,705
8,629
188
6,651
3,573
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
21,365
23,785
0
0
21,365
23,785
692
36,338
58,836
1,093
48,013
25,082
770
40,453
65,500
1,217
53,451
27,923
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
692
36,338
58,836
1,093
48,013
25,082
770
40,453
65,500
1,217
53,451
27,923
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
170,054
189,315
0
0
170,054
189,315
293
32,714
42,137
511
38,727
21,788
326
36,419
46,909
569
43,113
24,255
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
293
32,714
42,137
511
38,727
21,788
326
36,419
46,909
569
43,113
24,255
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
136,169
151,592
0
0
136,169
151,592
1,046
377,141
346,389
1,004
271,764
136,507
1,165
419,858
385,622
1,118
302,545
151,968
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,046
377,141
346,389
1,004
271,764
136,507
1,165
419,858
385,622
1,118
302,545
151,968
1,133,851
1,262,277
0
0
1,133,851
1,262,277
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00177
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70874
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
567
4,250
2,775
24,984
2,148
631
4,732
3,089
27,813
2,392
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
567
4,250
2,775
24,984
2,148
631
4,732
3,089
27,813
2,392
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
34,724
38,657
0
0
34,724
38,657
56
11,136
17,845
175
12,429
8,172
63
12,397
19,866
194
13,836
9,097
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
11,136
17,845
175
12,429
8,172
63
12,397
19,866
194
13,836
9,097
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
49,812
55,453
0
0
49,812
55,453
207
21,078
35,118
458
27,043
19,011
230
23,466
39,096
510
30,106
21,164
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
207
21,078
35,118
458
27,043
19,011
230
23,466
39,096
510
30,106
21,164
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
102,915
114,572
0
0
102,915
114,572
117
4,125
6,761
118
5,329
3,191
130
4,593
7,527
131
5,933
3,553
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
117
4,125
6,761
118
5,329
3,191
130
4,593
7,527
131
5,933
3,553
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
19,641
21,866
0
0
19,641
21,866
141
7,277
11,052
132
9,825
4,802
157
8,101
12,304
147
10,938
5,346
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
141
7,277
11,052
132
9,825
4,802
157
8,101
12,304
147
10,938
5,346
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
33,228
36,991
0
0
33,228
36,991
98
92,334
118,010
2,772
190,450
78,264
110
102,792
131,377
3,086
212,021
87,129
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
98
92,334
118,010
2,772
190,450
78,264
110
102,792
131,377
3,086
212,021
87,129
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
481,928
536,514
0
0
481,928
536,514
867
39,176
40,295
1,327
52,599
22,771
965
43,614
44,859
1,478
58,556
25,350
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
867
39,176
40,295
1,327
52,599
22,771
965
43,614
44,859
1,478
58,556
25,350
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
157,035
174,822
0
0
157,035
174,822
145
10,934
15,296
60
12,788
5,328
161
12,172
17,029
67
14,236
5,931
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
145
10,934
15,296
60
12,788
5,328
161
12,172
17,029
67
14,236
5,931
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
44,550
49,596
0
0
44,550
49,596
36
21,372
31,301
130
26,358
15,033
40
23,793
34,846
144
29,343
16,735
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
21,372
31,301
130
26,358
15,033
40
23,793
34,846
144
29,343
16,735
Subtotal ...........................................................
94,230
104,902
0
0
94,230
104,902
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00178
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70875
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
0%
2%
15,605
1,378,350
2,242,945
32,760
1,298,373
1,074,393
17,373
1,534,470
2,496,993
36,470
1,445,433
1,196,084
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,605
1,378,350
2,242,945
32,760
1,298,373
1,074,393
17,373
1,534,470
2,496,993
36,470
1,445,433
1,196,084
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Humidity Control:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
6,042,426
6,726,823
0
0
6,042,426
6,726,823
24,304
2,492,895
3,610,734
53,601
2,605,377
1,778,174
27,056
2,775,253
4,019,704
59,672
2,900,476
1,979,579
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,304
2,492,895
3,610,734
53,601
2,605,377
1,778,174
27,056
2,775,253
4,019,704
59,672
2,900,476
1,979,579
Total ................................................................
10,565,084
11,761,741
0
0
10,565,084
11,761,741
New Employee Acclimatization—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00179
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22,683
14,046
658
34,594
10,637
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22,683
14,046
658
34,594
10,637
0
22,683
14,046
658
34,594
10,637
0
0
82,618
0
82,618
82,618
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,839
10,086
756
17,336
7,440
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,839
10,086
756
17,336
7,440
0
8,839
10,086
756
17,336
7,440
0
0
44,458
0
44,458
44,458
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66,528
93,907
9,308
159,557
66,267
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66,528
93,907
9,308
159,557
66,267
0
66,528
93,907
9,308
159,557
66,267
0
0
395,566
0
395,566
395,566
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
129,541
177,518
16,312
294,027
66,918
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
129,541
177,518
16,312
294,027
66,918
0
129,541
177,518
16,312
294,027
66,918
0
0
684,317
0
684,317
684,317
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,288
2,184
228
3,057
1,351
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,288
2,184
228
3,057
1,351
0
1,288
2,184
228
3,057
1,351
0
0
8,108
0
8,108
8,108
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23,521
35,839
3,250
52,232
28,306
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23,521
35,839
3,250
52,232
28,306
0
23,521
35,839
3,250
52,232
28,306
0
0
143,148
0
143,148
143,148
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,304
16,305
0
0
0
0
13,304
16,305
0
13,304
16,305
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70876
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
931
26,401
11,705
0
0
0
931
26,401
11,705
931
26,401
11,705
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
68,645
0
68,645
68,645
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
96,792
91,190
1,258
117,159
44,603
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
96,792
91,190
1,258
117,159
44,603
0
96,792
91,190
1,258
117,159
44,603
0
0
351,003
0
351,003
351,003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,390
2,615
40,324
2,640
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,390
2,615
40,324
2,640
0
4,390
2,615
40,324
2,640
0
0
49,968
0
49,968
49,968
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,530
8,245
390
10,789
5,187
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,530
8,245
390
10,789
5,187
0
5,530
8,245
390
10,789
5,187
0
0
30,140
0
30,140
30,140
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,389
24,238
1,474
39,175
18,246
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,389
24,238
1,474
39,175
18,246
0
15,389
24,238
1,474
39,175
18,246
0
0
98,522
0
98,522
98,522
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,782
2,781
237
3,921
1,742
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,782
2,781
237
3,921
1,742
0
1,782
2,781
237
3,921
1,742
0
0
10,462
0
10,462
10,462
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,528
4,889
274
7,485
2,908
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,528
4,889
274
7,485
2,908
0
3,528
4,889
274
7,485
2,908
0
0
19,083
0
19,083
19,083
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,772
35,627
3,810
107,950
33,490
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,772
35,627
3,810
107,950
33,490
0
28,772
35,627
3,810
107,950
33,490
0
0
209,649
0
209,649
209,649
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,480
23,617
3,687
55,722
13,832
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,480
23,617
3,687
55,722
13,832
0
24,480
23,617
3,687
55,722
13,832
0
0
121,339
0
121,339
121,339
0
0
0
0
0
9,201
0
0
0
9,201
0
9,201
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00180
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70877
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,379
229
18,581
6,092
0
0
0
0
12,379
229
18,581
6,092
12,379
229
18,581
6,092
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
46,483
0
46,483
46,483
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,709
12,191
227
16,982
8,107
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,709
12,191
227
16,982
8,107
0
8,709
12,191
227
16,982
8,107
0
0
46,217
0
46,217
46,217
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
525,443
818,290
56,311
902,582
549,837
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
525,443
818,290
56,311
902,582
549,837
2
525,443
818,290
56,311
902,582
549,837
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for New Employee Acclimatization—Designated Person:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
2,852,465
0
2,852,465
2,852,465
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
989,721
1,385,945
99,338
1,907,875
879,308
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
989,721
1,385,945
99,338
1,907,875
879,308
3
989,721
1,385,945
99,338
1,907,875
879,308
Total ................................................................
0
0
5,262,190
0
5,262,190
5,262,190
Returning Employee Acclimatization—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00181
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
550
341
16
839
258
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
550
341
16
839
258
0
550
341
16
839
258
0
0
2,003
0
2,003
2,003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
252
308
21
523
226
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
252
308
21
523
226
0
252
308
21
523
226
0
0
1,329
0
1,329
1,329
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
429
606
63
996
429
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
429
606
63
996
429
0
429
606
63
996
429
0
0
2,524
0
2,524
2,524
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,049
2,806
258
4,652
1,053
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,049
2,806
258
4,652
1,053
0
2,049
2,806
258
4,652
1,053
0
0
10,819
0
10,819
10,819
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
56
6
79
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
56
6
79
0
33
56
6
79
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70878
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Western ..................................................................
0
0
35
0
35
35
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
209
0
209
209
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
779
1,186
107
1,731
946
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
779
1,186
107
1,731
946
0
779
1,186
107
1,731
946
0
0
4,748
0
4,748
4,748
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
343
420
24
680
302
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
343
420
24
680
302
0
343
420
24
680
302
0
0
1,769
0
1,769
1,769
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,339
3,146
43
4,042
1,539
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,339
3,146
43
4,042
1,539
0
3,339
3,146
43
4,042
1,539
0
0
12,108
0
12,108
12,108
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
103
61
958
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
103
61
958
62
0
103
61
958
62
0
0
1,184
0
1,184
1,184
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
102
152
7
199
96
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
102
152
7
199
96
0
102
152
7
199
96
0
0
556
0
556
556
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
108
7
174
81
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
108
7
174
81
0
68
108
7
174
81
0
0
437
0
437
437
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61
96
8
135
60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61
96
8
135
60
0
61
96
8
135
60
0
0
359
0
359
359
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
167
231
13
354
138
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
167
231
13
354
138
0
167
231
13
354
138
0
0
903
0
903
903
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
988
1,224
131
0
0
0
0
0
988
1,224
131
0
988
1,224
131
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00182
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70879
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
3,708
1,150
0
0
3,708
1,150
3,708
1,150
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
7,201
0
7,201
7,201
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
452
436
68
1,029
255
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
452
436
68
1,029
255
0
452
436
68
1,029
255
0
0
2,240
0
2,240
2,240
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
221
298
6
447
147
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
221
298
6
447
147
0
221
298
6
447
147
0
0
1,118
0
1,118
1,118
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
161
225
4
314
150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
161
225
4
314
150
0
161
225
4
314
150
0
0
853
0
853
853
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18,283
28,957
1,869
25,241
20,730
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18,283
28,957
1,869
25,241
20,730
0
18,283
28,957
1,869
25,241
20,730
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Returning Employee Acclimatization—
Designated Person:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
95,080
0
95,080
95,080
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,381
40,657
2,651
46,100
27,656
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,381
40,657
2,651
46,100
27,656
0
28,381
40,657
2,651
46,100
27,656
Total ................................................................
0
0
145,444
0
145,444
145,444
New Indoor Employee Acclimatization
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00183
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
193,345
118,157
5,594
292,499
90,313
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
193,345
118,157
5,594
292,499
90,313
0
193,345
118,157
5,594
292,499
90,313
0
0
699,909
0
699,909
699,909
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
200,995
228,631
17,117
387,695
167,006
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
200,995
228,631
17,117
387,695
167,006
1
200,995
228,631
17,117
387,695
167,006
0
0
1,001,445
0
1,001,445
1,001,445
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
2,459,217
3,471,889
343,188
5,921,221
2,451,199
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
2,459,217
3,471,889
343,188
5,921,221
2,451,199
6
2,459,217
3,471,889
343,188
5,921,221
2,451,199
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70880
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0%
2%
0
0
14,646,720
0
14,646,720
14,646,720
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1,828,198
2,533,833
222,954
4,123,445
1,027,254
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1,828,198
2,533,833
222,954
4,123,445
1,027,254
7
1,828,198
2,533,833
222,954
4,123,445
1,027,254
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
9,735,691
0
9,735,691
9,735,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35,160
59,609
6,222
83,456
36,894
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35,160
59,609
6,222
83,456
36,894
0
35,160
59,609
6,222
83,456
36,894
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
221,342
0
221,342
221,342
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
227,016
346,329
30,706
504,064
266,057
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
227,016
346,329
30,706
504,064
266,057
1
227,016
346,329
30,706
504,064
266,057
0
0
1,374,173
0
1,374,173
1,374,173
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
271,890
332,610
18,859
542,961
237,715
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
271,890
332,610
18,859
542,961
237,715
1
271,890
332,610
18,859
542,961
237,715
0
0
1,404,036
0
1,404,036
1,404,036
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2,361,334
2,209,292
29,010
2,797,246
1,073,345
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2,361,334
2,209,292
29,010
2,797,246
1,073,345
2
2,361,334
2,209,292
29,010
2,797,246
1,073,345
0
0
8,470,228
0
8,470,228
8,470,228
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
53,570
31,858
486,559
31,794
0
0
0
0
0
2
53,570
31,858
486,559
31,794
2
53,570
31,858
486,559
31,794
0
0
603,784
0
603,784
603,784
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
98,673
147,574
6,848
193,367
94,004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
98,673
147,574
6,848
193,367
94,004
0
98,673
147,574
6,848
193,367
94,004
0
0
540,465
0
540,465
540,465
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
211,899
333,853
20,233
540,964
252,184
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
211,899
333,853
20,233
540,964
252,184
1
211,899
333,853
20,233
540,964
252,184
0
0
1,359,134
0
1,359,134
1,359,134
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,083
36,457
3,068
51,809
23,188
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,083
36,457
3,068
51,809
23,188
0
24,083
36,457
3,068
51,809
23,188
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00184
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70881
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
0
0
138,605
0
138,605
138,605
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73,774
102,236
5,728
156,530
60,813
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73,774
102,236
5,728
156,530
60,813
0
73,774
102,236
5,728
156,530
60,813
0
0
399,081
0
399,081
399,081
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
545,638
675,623
72,247
2,047,160
635,109
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
545,638
675,623
72,247
2,047,160
635,109
0
545,638
675,623
72,247
2,047,160
635,109
0
0
3,975,776
0
3,975,776
3,975,776
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
349,275
340,221
52,048
797,648
198,447
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
349,275
340,221
52,048
797,648
198,447
2
349,275
340,221
52,048
797,648
198,447
0
0
1,737,639
0
1,737,639
1,737,639
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
186,352
250,671
4,646
376,360
123,487
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
186,352
250,671
4,646
376,360
123,487
1
186,352
250,671
4,646
376,360
123,487
0
0
941,515
0
941,515
941,515
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
194,963
272,889
5,083
380,156
181,486
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
194,963
272,889
5,083
380,156
181,486
0
194,963
272,889
5,083
380,156
181,486
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
1,034,577
0
1,034,577
1,034,577
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
32
11,211,606
17,218,995
1,136,938
19,641,718
11,524,405
0
0
0
0
0
0
32
11,211,606
17,218,995
1,136,938
19,641,718
11,524,405
32
11,211,606
17,218,995
1,136,938
19,641,718
11,524,405
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for New Indoor Employee Acclimatization:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
60,733,695
0
60,733,695
60,733,695
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
20,526,989
28,710,726
1,980,487
39,324,858
18,474,699
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
20,526,989
28,710,726
1,980,487
39,324,858
18,474,699
56
20,526,989
28,710,726
1,980,487
39,324,858
18,474,699
Total ................................................................
0
0
109,017,815
0
109,017,815
109,017,815
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
New Outdoor Employee Acclimatization
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00185
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
555,498
345,783
16,128
849,910
260,886
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
555,498
345,783
16,128
849,910
260,886
1
555,498
345,783
16,128
849,910
260,886
0
0
2,028,206
0
2,028,206
2,028,206
0
0
0
0
0
116,270
0
0
0
116,270
0
116,270
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70882
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
133,667
10,037
236,477
100,700
0
0
0
0
133,667
10,037
236,477
100,700
133,667
10,037
236,477
100,700
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
597,153
0
597,153
597,153
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
237,085
333,855
32,738
556,756
233,410
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
237,085
333,855
32,738
556,756
233,410
1
237,085
333,855
32,738
556,756
233,410
0
0
1,393,844
0
1,393,844
1,393,844
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
3,377,743
4,623,309
427,668
7,682,911
1,736,798
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
3,377,743
4,623,309
427,668
7,682,911
1,736,798
12
3,377,743
4,623,309
427,668
7,682,911
1,736,798
0
0
17,848,441
0
17,848,441
17,848,441
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,476
19,456
2,031
27,240
12,042
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,476
19,456
2,031
27,240
12,042
0
11,476
19,456
2,031
27,240
12,042
0
0
72,246
0
72,246
72,246
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
507,726
773,553
71,873
1,125,493
610,538
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
507,726
773,553
71,873
1,125,493
610,538
2
507,726
773,553
71,873
1,125,493
610,538
0
0
3,089,185
0
3,089,185
3,089,185
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
222,942
273,945
15,795
438,537
197,862
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
222,942
273,945
15,795
438,537
197,862
1
222,942
273,945
15,795
438,537
197,862
0
0
1,149,081
0
1,149,081
1,149,081
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
529,914
516,810
8,812
711,140
261,112
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
529,914
516,810
8,812
711,140
261,112
1
529,914
516,810
8,812
711,140
261,112
0
0
2,027,789
0
2,027,789
2,027,789
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
95,998
57,257
890,293
58,298
0
0
0
0
0
4
95,998
57,257
890,293
58,298
4
95,998
57,257
890,293
58,298
0
0
1,101,849
0
1,101,849
1,101,849
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80,470
119,456
5,817
156,028
73,827
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80,470
119,456
5,817
156,028
73,827
0
80,470
119,456
5,817
156,028
73,827
0
0
435,598
0
435,598
435,598
0
0
1
0
1
1
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00186
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70883
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
288,790
455,142
27,480
733,313
342,375
0
0
0
0
0
288,790
455,142
27,480
733,313
342,375
288,790
455,142
27,480
733,313
342,375
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
1,847,101
0
1,847,101
1,847,101
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,326
45,492
3,910
63,700
28,103
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,326
45,492
3,910
63,700
28,103
0
28,326
45,492
3,910
63,700
28,103
0
0
169,531
0
169,531
169,531
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61,192
84,800
4,751
129,833
50,442
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61,192
84,800
4,751
129,833
50,442
0
61,192
84,800
4,751
129,833
50,442
0
0
331,018
0
331,018
331,018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
278,149
344,411
36,829
1,043,577
323,758
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
278,149
344,411
36,829
1,043,577
323,758
0
278,149
344,411
36,829
1,043,577
323,758
0
0
2,026,725
0
2,026,725
2,026,725
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
456,381
436,573
69,357
1,035,820
256,606
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
456,381
436,573
69,357
1,035,820
256,606
3
456,381
436,573
69,357
1,035,820
256,606
0
0
2,254,740
0
2,254,740
2,254,740
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
257,850
346,941
6,406
520,692
170,610
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
257,850
346,941
6,406
520,692
170,610
1
257,850
346,941
6,406
520,692
170,610
0
0
1,302,500
0
1,302,500
1,302,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
81,507
114,085
2,125
158,929
75,873
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
81,507
114,085
2,125
158,929
75,873
0
81,507
114,085
2,125
158,929
75,873
0
0
432,519
0
432,519
432,519
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
8,624,746
13,666,774
981,519
13,733,045
9,513,647
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
8,624,746
13,666,774
981,519
13,733,045
9,513,647
30
8,624,746
13,666,774
981,519
13,733,045
9,513,647
0
0
46,519,760
0
46,519,760
46,519,760
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
15,812,062
22,691,309
1,723,276
30,093,696
14,306,888
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
15,812,062
22,691,309
1,723,276
30,093,696
14,306,888
56
15,812,062
22,691,309
1,723,276
30,093,696
14,306,888
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for New Outdoor Employee Acclimatization:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00187
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70884
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Total ................................................................
2%
0
0
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
84,627,286
0%
2%
0
84,627,286
84,627,286
Returning Indoor Employee Acclimatization
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00188
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,688
2,865
136
7,092
6,503
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,688
2,865
136
7,092
6,503
0
4,688
2,865
136
7,092
6,503
0
0
21,284
0
21,284
21,284
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,665
6,911
461
11,569
5,026
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,665
6,911
461
11,569
5,026
0
5,665
6,911
461
11,569
5,026
0
0
29,632
0
29,632
29,632
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,124
22,774
2,386
37,431
16,151
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,124
22,774
2,386
37,431
16,151
0
16,124
22,774
2,386
37,431
16,151
0
0
94,866
0
94,866
94,866
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40,091
55,085
4,992
90,641
41,364
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40,091
55,085
4,992
90,641
41,364
0
40,091
55,085
4,992
90,641
41,364
0
0
232,173
0
232,173
232,173
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
906
1,536
160
2,150
951
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
906
1,536
160
2,150
951
0
906
1,536
160
2,150
951
0
0
5,703
0
5,703
5,703
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,457
11,364
990
16,560
7,104
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,457
11,364
990
16,560
7,104
0
7,457
11,364
990
16,560
7,104
0
0
43,475
0
43,475
43,475
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,006
8,570
486
13,990
6,125
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,006
8,570
486
13,990
6,125
0
7,006
8,570
486
13,990
6,125
0
0
36,177
0
36,177
36,177
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
122,175
114,309
1,501
144,730
55,535
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
122,175
114,309
1,501
144,730
55,535
0
122,175
114,309
1,501
144,730
55,535
0
0
438,250
0
438,250
438,250
0
0
0
0
0
1,123
0
0
0
1,123
0
1,123
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70885
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
674
10,578
781
0
0
0
674
10,578
781
674
10,578
781
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
13,157
0
13,157
13,157
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,822
2,724
126
3,570
1,735
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,822
2,724
126
3,570
1,735
0
1,822
2,724
126
3,570
1,735
0
0
9,978
0
9,978
9,978
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
942
1,484
89
2,404
1,122
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
942
1,484
89
2,404
1,122
0
942
1,484
89
2,404
1,122
0
0
6,041
0
6,041
6,041
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
827
1,252
105
1,780
796
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
827
1,252
105
1,780
796
0
827
1,252
105
1,780
796
0
0
4,761
0
4,761
4,761
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,492
4,840
271
7,410
2,879
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,492
4,840
271
7,410
2,879
0
3,492
4,840
271
7,410
2,879
0
0
18,893
0
18,893
18,893
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18,741
23,206
2,482
70,315
21,815
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18,741
23,206
2,482
70,315
21,815
0
18,741
23,206
2,482
70,315
21,815
0
0
136,559
0
136,559
136,559
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,448
6,281
961
14,726
5,045
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,448
6,281
961
14,726
5,045
0
6,448
6,281
961
14,726
5,045
0
0
33,461
0
33,461
33,461
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,482
6,029
112
9,053
2,970
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,482
6,029
112
9,053
2,970
0
4,482
6,029
112
9,053
2,970
0
0
22,646
0
22,646
22,646
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,599
5,038
94
7,018
3,351
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,599
5,038
94
7,018
3,351
0
3,599
5,038
94
7,018
3,351
0
0
19,100
0
19,100
19,100
0
0
1
0
1
1
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00189
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70886
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
374,077
578,128
35,713
545,004
407,593
0
0
0
0
0
374,077
578,128
35,713
545,004
407,593
374,077
578,128
35,713
545,004
407,593
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Returning Indoor Employee Acclimatization:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
1,940,516
0
1,940,516
1,940,516
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
619,667
853,071
51,065
996,021
586,847
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
619,667
853,071
51,065
996,021
586,847
2
619,667
853,071
51,065
996,021
586,847
Total ................................................................
0
0
3,106,673
0
3,106,673
3,106,673
Returning Outdoor Employee Acclimatization
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00190
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,470
8,384
391
20,608
18,563
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,470
8,384
391
20,608
18,563
0
13,470
8,384
391
20,608
18,563
0
0
61,417
0
61,417
61,417
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,401
4,165
282
7,291
3,127
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,401
4,165
282
7,291
3,127
0
3,401
4,165
282
7,291
3,127
0
0
18,266
0
18,266
18,266
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,652
2,329
247
3,706
1,641
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,652
2,329
247
3,706
1,641
0
1,652
2,329
247
3,706
1,641
0
0
9,576
0
9,576
9,576
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
76,776
104,503
9,850
174,940
80,015
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
76,776
104,503
9,850
174,940
80,015
0
76,776
104,503
9,850
174,940
80,015
0
0
446,085
0
446,085
446,085
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
296
501
52
702
310
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
296
501
52
702
310
0
296
501
52
702
310
0
0
1,862
0
1,862
1,862
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,658
25,377
2,343
37,002
15,747
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,658
25,377
2,343
37,002
15,747
0
16,658
25,377
2,343
37,002
15,747
0
0
97,128
0
97,128
97,128
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,744
7,059
407
0
0
0
0
0
5,744
7,059
407
0
5,744
7,059
407
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70887
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
11,300
5,098
0
0
11,300
5,098
11,300
5,098
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
29,608
0
29,608
29,608
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27,418
26,740
456
36,794
13,510
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27,418
26,740
456
36,794
13,510
0
27,418
26,740
456
36,794
13,510
0
0
104,918
0
104,918
104,918
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,029
1,221
19,469
1,434
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,029
1,221
19,469
1,434
0
2,029
1,221
19,469
1,434
0
0
24,153
0
24,153
24,153
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,486
2,205
107
2,881
1,363
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,486
2,205
107
2,881
1,363
0
1,486
2,205
107
2,881
1,363
0
0
8,042
0
8,042
8,042
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,284
2,024
121
3,259
1,524
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,284
2,024
121
3,259
1,524
0
1,284
2,024
121
3,259
1,524
0
0
8,213
0
8,213
8,213
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
973
1,563
134
2,188
965
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
973
1,563
134
2,188
965
0
973
1,563
134
2,188
965
0
0
5,823
0
5,823
5,823
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,897
4,014
225
6,146
2,388
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,897
4,014
225
6,146
2,388
0
2,897
4,014
225
6,146
2,388
0
0
15,670
0
15,670
15,670
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,554
11,830
1,265
35,845
11,120
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,554
11,830
1,265
35,845
11,120
0
9,554
11,830
1,265
35,845
11,120
0
0
69,614
0
69,614
69,614
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,425
8,060
1,280
19,123
6,496
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,425
8,060
1,280
19,123
6,496
0
8,425
8,060
1,280
19,123
6,496
0
0
43,384
0
43,384
43,384
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,202
8,345
0
0
0
0
6,202
8,345
0
6,202
8,345
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00191
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70888
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
154
12,524
4,104
0
0
0
154
12,524
4,104
154
12,524
4,104
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
31,329
0
31,329
31,329
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,505
2,106
39
2,934
1,401
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,505
2,106
39
2,934
1,401
0
1,505
2,106
39
2,934
1,401
0
0
7,985
0
7,985
7,985
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
333,854
542,408
35,984
394,771
406,653
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
333,854
542,408
35,984
394,771
406,653
1
333,854
542,408
35,984
394,771
406,653
0
0
1,713,672
0
1,713,672
1,713,672
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
513,623
762,835
53,340
791,484
575,460
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
513,623
762,835
53,340
791,484
575,460
2
513,623
762,835
53,340
791,484
575,460
0
0
2,696,744
0
2,696,744
2,696,744
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Returning Outdoor Employee Acclimatization:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total ................................................................
Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—Indoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00192
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
494,281
285,957
15,605
795,586
661,911
2
115,332
66,723
3,641
185,637
154,446
6
378,949
219,234
11,964
609,949
507,465
6
378,949
219,234
11,964
609,949
507,465
0
0
2,253,348
525,781
1,727,567
1,727,567
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
542,090
654,987
48,716
1,259,531
489,137
7
126,488
152,830
11,367
293,891
114,132
23
415,602
502,157
37,349
965,641
375,005
23
415,602
502,157
37,349
965,641
375,005
0
0
2,994,491
698,714
2,295,776
2,295,776
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73
1,857,283
2,613,642
436,216
5,793,449
1,917,574
17
433,366
609,850
101,784
1,351,805
447,434
56
1,423,917
2,003,792
334,433
4,441,644
1,470,140
56
1,423,917
2,003,792
334,433
4,441,644
1,470,140
0
0
12,618,237
2,944,255
9,673,982
9,673,982
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
246
3,219,194
4,443,035
502,541
8,615,101
3,402,628
57
751,145
1,036,708
117,260
2,010,190
793,947
189
2,468,049
3,406,327
385,282
6,604,911
2,608,682
189
2,468,049
3,406,327
385,282
6,604,911
2,608,682
0
0
20,182,745
4,709,307
15,473,438
15,473,438
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
87,222
147,275
17,020
239,057
92,951
1
20,352
34,364
3,971
55,780
21,689
3
66,870
112,911
13,048
183,277
71,263
3
66,870
112,911
13,048
183,277
71,263
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70889
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total annualized
0%
2%
0
0
583,529
136,157
447,372
447,372
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
705,904
1,087,767
99,076
1,798,521
685,161
17
164,711
253,812
23,118
419,655
159,871
57
541,193
833,955
75,959
1,378,866
525,290
57
541,193
833,955
75,959
1,378,866
525,290
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
4,376,505
1,021,184
3,355,320
3,355,320
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
675,747
834,797
52,772
1,556,716
608,916
8
157,674
194,786
12,313
363,234
142,080
26
518,072
640,011
40,458
1,193,482
466,836
26
518,072
640,011
40,458
1,193,482
466,836
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
3,728,982
870,096
2,858,886
2,858,886
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
143
8,513,706
8,181,403
107,956
11,413,732
4,062,091
33
1,986,531
1,908,994
25,190
2,663,204
947,821
110
6,527,175
6,272,409
82,766
8,750,528
3,114,270
110
6,527,175
6,272,409
82,766
8,750,528
3,114,270
0
0
32,279,030
7,531,774
24,747,257
24,747,257
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
86
113,630
64,273
1,170,506
77,990
20
26,514
14,997
273,118
18,198
66
87,116
49,276
897,388
59,792
66
87,116
49,276
897,388
59,792
0
0
1,426,485
332,846
1,093,638
1,093,638
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
181,573
269,273
14,502
418,102
177,024
1
42,367
62,830
3,384
97,557
41,306
4
139,206
206,442
11,118
320,545
135,719
4
139,206
206,442
11,118
320,545
135,719
0
0
1,060,480
247,445
813,034
813,034
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
125,999
194,885
22,307
456,939
153,737
1
29,400
45,473
5,205
106,619
35,872
4
96,599
149,412
17,102
350,320
117,865
4
96,599
149,412
17,102
350,320
117,865
0
0
953,872
222,570
731,302
731,302
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
78,193
117,476
10,513
191,472
77,662
3
18,245
27,411
2,453
44,677
18,121
10
59,948
90,065
8,060
146,795
59,541
10
59,948
90,065
8,060
146,795
59,541
0
0
475,329
110,910
364,419
364,419
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
326,875
451,879
24,069
773,027
274,288
8
76,271
105,439
5,616
180,373
64,001
27
250,604
346,441
18,453
592,654
210,288
27
250,604
346,441
18,453
592,654
210,288
0
0
1,850,175
431,707
1,418,467
1,418,467
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
1,764,509
2,223,951
237,694
7,717,829
2,078,922
2
411,719
518,922
55,462
1,800,827
485,082
8
1,352,790
1,705,029
182,232
5,917,003
1,593,840
8
1,352,790
1,705,029
182,232
5,917,003
1,593,840
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00193
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70890
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual cost
savings
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2%
Total annualized
0%
2%
0
0
14,022,916
3,272,014
10,750,903
10,750,903
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
78
644,184
626,041
114,259
1,718,290
519,628
18
150,310
146,076
26,660
400,934
121,246
60
493,874
479,965
87,598
1,317,356
398,381
60
493,874
479,965
87,598
1,317,356
398,381
0
0
3,622,479
845,245
2,777,234
2,777,234
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
433,621
581,993
13,832
1,004,639
303,370
8
101,178
135,798
3,228
234,416
70,786
26
332,443
446,195
10,605
770,223
232,584
26
332,443
446,195
10,605
770,223
232,584
0
0
2,337,489
545,414
1,792,075
1,792,075
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
359,090
508,162
11,186
810,689
338,273
1
83,788
118,571
2,610
189,161
78,930
2
275,302
389,591
8,576
621,528
259,343
2
275,302
389,591
8,576
621,528
259,343
0
0
2,027,404
473,061
1,554,343
1,554,343
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,385
19,589,073
30,377,960
1,959,466
33,508,390
21,969,623
323
4,570,784
7,088,191
457,209
7,818,624
5,126,245
1,062
15,018,289
23,289,770
1,502,257
25,689,765
16,843,378
1,062
15,018,289
23,289,770
1,502,257
25,689,765
16,843,378
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—Indoor:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
107,405,896
25,061,376
82,344,521
82,344,521
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,268
39,712,173
53,664,756
3,687,730
79,241,576
37,890,887
529
9,266,174
12,521,777
860,470
18,489,701
8,841,207
1,739
30,445,999
41,142,980
2,827,260
60,751,875
29,049,680
1,739
30,445,999
41,142,980
2,827,260
60,751,875
29,049,680
Total ................................................................
0
0
214,199,392
49,979,858
164,219,534
164,219,534
Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—Outdoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00194
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
1,447,844
854,788
45,903
2,356,557
1,932,124
5
289,569
170,958
9,181
471,311
386,425
21
1,158,275
683,830
36,722
1,885,246
1,545,700
21
1,158,275
683,830
36,722
1,885,246
1,545,700
0
0
6,637,243
1,327,449
5,309,794
5,309,794
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
331,125
402,033
30,235
807,047
309,009
4
66,225
80,407
6,047
161,409
61,802
15
264,900
321,626
24,188
645,638
247,207
15
264,900
321,626
24,188
645,638
247,207
0
0
1,879,467
375,893
1,503,574
1,503,574
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
188,883
264,517
43,628
568,982
193,195
2
37,777
52,903
8,726
113,796
38,639
6
151,106
211,613
34,903
455,186
154,556
6
151,106
211,613
34,903
455,186
154,556
0
0
1,259,213
251,843
1,007,371
1,007,371
0
0
441
88
353
353
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70891
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Total annualized
0%
2%
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,152,988
8,382,560
995,358
16,580,548
6,576,720
1,230,598
1,676,512
199,072
3,316,110
1,315,344
4,922,390
6,706,048
796,286
13,264,438
5,261,376
4,922,390
6,706,048
796,286
13,264,438
5,261,376
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
38,688,614
7,737,723
30,950,891
30,950,891
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
29,041
49,035
5,667
79,594
30,948
0
5,808
9,807
1,133
15,919
6,190
1
23,232
39,228
4,533
63,675
24,759
1
23,232
39,228
4,533
63,675
24,759
0
0
194,286
38,857
155,429
155,429
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
127
1,609,058
2,479,858
239,411
4,100,068
1,553,009
25
321,812
495,972
47,882
820,014
310,602
102
1,287,246
1,983,886
191,529
3,280,054
1,242,407
102
1,287,246
1,983,886
191,529
3,280,054
1,242,407
0
0
9,981,530
1,996,306
7,985,224
7,985,224
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
565,344
700,860
45,008
1,283,101
516,573
6
113,069
140,172
9,002
256,620
103,315
23
452,275
560,688
36,006
1,026,481
413,258
23
452,275
560,688
36,006
1,026,481
413,258
0
0
3,110,915
622,183
2,488,732
2,488,732
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
1,954,406
1,956,554
33,381
2,961,164
1,008,707
10
390,881
391,311
6,676
592,233
201,741
41
1,563,525
1,565,244
26,705
2,368,931
806,965
41
1,563,525
1,565,244
26,705
2,368,931
806,965
0
0
7,914,264
1,582,853
6,331,411
6,331,411
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
164
209,271
118,661
2,196,724
145,839
33
41,854
23,732
439,345
29,168
131
167,417
94,929
1,757,379
116,671
131
167,417
94,929
1,757,379
116,671
0
0
2,670,659
534,132
2,136,527
2,136,527
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
150,995
222,509
12,567
343,861
141,847
1
30,199
44,502
2,513
68,772
28,369
4
120,796
178,007
10,053
275,089
113,478
4
120,796
178,007
10,053
275,089
113,478
0
0
871,785
174,357
697,428
697,428
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
175,190
271,067
30,901
631,736
213,035
2
35,038
54,213
6,180
126,347
42,607
6
140,152
216,853
24,721
505,389
170,428
6
140,152
216,853
24,721
505,389
170,428
0
0
1,321,937
264,387
1,057,550
1,057,550
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
93,862
149,142
13,534
239,950
95,962
4
18,772
29,828
2,707
47,990
19,192
15
75,090
119,314
10,827
191,960
76,770
15
75,090
119,314
10,827
191,960
76,770
0
0
592,470
118,494
473,976
473,976
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00195
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70892
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
276,569
382,333
20,365
654,055
232,075
6
55,314
76,467
4,073
130,811
46,415
24
221,255
305,867
16,292
523,244
185,660
24
221,255
305,867
16,292
523,244
185,660
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
1,565,427
313,085
1,252,342
1,252,342
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
917,544
1,156,453
123,601
4,013,267
1,081,038
1
183,509
231,291
24,720
802,653
216,208
4
734,035
925,162
98,881
3,210,613
864,831
4
734,035
925,162
98,881
3,210,613
864,831
0
0
7,291,908
1,458,382
5,833,527
5,833,527
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
112
858,719
818,869
154,829
2,274,433
683,172
22
171,744
163,774
30,966
454,887
136,634
90
686,975
655,096
123,863
1,819,546
546,538
90
686,975
655,096
123,863
1,819,546
546,538
0
0
4,790,135
958,027
3,832,108
3,832,108
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
612,027
821,643
19,465
1,417,789
427,591
9
122,405
164,329
3,893
283,558
85,518
38
489,621
657,315
15,572
1,134,231
342,073
38
489,621
657,315
15,572
1,134,231
342,073
0
0
3,298,562
659,712
2,638,849
2,638,849
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
153,135
216,708
4,770
345,721
144,258
0
30,627
43,342
954
69,144
28,852
1
122,508
173,366
3,816
276,577
115,406
1
122,508
173,366
3,816
276,577
115,406
0
0
864,594
172,919
691,675
691,675
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,602
17,577,924
28,801,093
1,933,219
24,553,870
22,012,012
320
3,515,585
5,760,219
386,644
4,910,774
4,402,402
1,282
14,062,339
23,040,875
1,546,575
19,643,096
17,609,610
1,282
14,062,339
23,040,875
1,546,575
19,643,096
17,609,610
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Rest Breaks at Initial Heat Trigger—
Outdoor:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
94,879,721
18,975,944
75,903,777
75,903,777
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,698
33,303,923
48,048,684
3,751,841
65,408,469
37,297,115
540
6,660,785
9,609,737
750,368
13,081,694
7,459,423
2,158
26,643,138
38,438,947
3,001,473
52,326,776
29,837,692
2,158
26,643,138
38,438,947
3,001,473
52,326,776
29,837,692
Total ................................................................
0
0
187,812,730
37,562,546
150,250,184
150,250,184
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Effective Communication—Supervisor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00196
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
1,964,364
1,215,238
44,631
4,074,345
2,888,709
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
1,964,364
1,215,238
44,631
4,074,345
2,888,709
28
1,964,364
1,215,238
44,631
4,074,345
2,888,709
0
0
10,187,315
0
10,187,315
10,187,315
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
765,503
961,428
0
0
0
36
765,503
961,428
36
765,503
961,428
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70893
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
54,471
2,264,317
764,695
0
0
0
54,471
2,264,317
764,695
54,471
2,264,317
764,695
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
4,810,451
0
4,810,451
4,810,451
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
131
3,143,911
4,732,451
380,104
10,585,830
3,623,278
0
0
0
0
0
0
131
3,143,911
4,732,451
380,104
10,585,830
3,623,278
131
3,143,911
4,732,451
380,104
10,585,830
3,623,278
0
0
22,465,706
0
22,465,706
22,465,706
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
559
9,137,347
13,712,035
992,545
31,427,215
10,961,509
0
0
0
0
0
0
559
9,137,347
13,712,035
992,545
31,427,215
10,961,509
559
9,137,347
13,712,035
992,545
31,427,215
10,961,509
0
0
66,231,210
0
66,231,210
66,231,210
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
105,390
192,692
15,964
369,774
127,300
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
105,390
192,692
15,964
369,774
127,300
4
105,390
192,692
15,964
369,774
127,300
0
0
811,123
0
811,123
811,123
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
156
2,235,263
3,759,687
263,459
7,391,500
2,457,942
0
0
0
0
0
0
156
2,235,263
3,759,687
263,459
7,391,500
2,457,942
156
2,235,263
3,759,687
263,459
7,391,500
2,457,942
0
0
16,108,008
0
16,108,008
16,108,008
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
1,088,876
1,448,306
65,204
3,198,265
1,106,431
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
1,088,876
1,448,306
65,204
3,198,265
1,106,431
45
1,088,876
1,448,306
65,204
3,198,265
1,106,431
0
0
6,907,125
0
6,907,125
6,907,125
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
151
10,477,364
10,527,247
116,915
18,442,859
5,656,280
0
0
0
0
0
0
151
10,477,364
10,527,247
116,915
18,442,859
5,656,280
151
10,477,364
10,527,247
116,915
18,442,859
5,656,280
0
0
45,220,816
0
45,220,816
45,220,816
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
197
294,598
178,004
4,394,986
213,864
0
0
0
0
0
197
294,598
178,004
4,394,986
213,864
197
294,598
178,004
4,394,986
213,864
0
0
5,081,648
0
5,081,648
5,081,648
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
380,967
605,787
22,894
1,074,645
409,080
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
380,967
605,787
22,894
1,074,645
409,080
10
380,967
605,787
22,894
1,074,645
409,080
0
0
2,493,383
0
2,493,383
2,493,383
0
0
0
0
33
660,935
0
0
33
660,935
33
660,935
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00197
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70894
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,121,133
54,251
2,414,130
906,381
0
0
0
0
1,121,133
54,251
2,414,130
906,381
1,121,133
54,251
2,414,130
906,381
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
5,156,864
0
5,156,864
5,156,864
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
171,785
288,897
19,746
573,019
196,550
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
171,785
288,897
19,746
573,019
196,550
25
171,785
288,897
19,746
573,019
196,550
0
0
1,250,023
0
1,250,023
1,250,023
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
425,813
643,399
28,284
1,330,181
403,641
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
425,813
643,399
28,284
1,330,181
403,641
36
425,813
643,399
28,284
1,330,181
403,641
0
0
2,831,354
0
2,831,354
2,831,354
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
2,758,017
3,814,255
317,980
15,855,219
3,754,041
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
2,758,017
3,814,255
317,980
15,855,219
3,754,041
13
2,758,017
3,814,255
317,980
15,855,219
3,754,041
0
0
26,499,525
0
26,499,525
26,499,525
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
176
1,693,569
1,739,047
216,193
5,538,578
1,501,275
0
0
0
0
0
0
176
1,693,569
1,739,047
216,193
5,538,578
1,501,275
176
1,693,569
1,739,047
216,193
5,538,578
1,501,275
0
0
10,688,839
0
10,688,839
10,688,839
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
721,516
1,032,539
15,379
2,119,922
557,975
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
721,516
1,032,539
15,379
2,119,922
557,975
45
721,516
1,032,539
15,379
2,119,922
557,975
0
0
4,447,375
0
4,447,375
4,447,375
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
611,486
901,301
13,316
1,668,522
636,547
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
611,486
901,301
13,316
1,668,522
636,547
4
611,486
901,301
13,316
1,668,522
636,547
0
0
3,831,178
0
3,831,178
3,831,178
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,664
28,533,033
49,053,020
2,542,930
62,702,524
36,703,176
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,664
28,533,033
49,053,020
2,542,930
62,702,524
36,703,176
1,664
28,533,033
49,053,020
2,542,930
62,702,524
36,703,176
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Effective Communication—Supervisor:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
179,536,346
0
179,536,346
179,536,346
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,312
65,169,736
95,926,466
5,164,266
175,425,832
72,868,675
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,312
65,169,736
95,926,466
5,164,266
175,425,832
72,868,675
3,312
65,169,736
95,926,466
5,164,266
175,425,832
72,868,675
Total ................................................................
0
0
414,558,288
0
414,558,288
414,558,288
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00198
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70895
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Effective Communication—Employee
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00199
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
2,112,774
1,307,050
48,003
4,382,165
3,106,954
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
2,112,774
1,307,050
48,003
4,382,165
3,106,954
30
2,112,774
1,307,050
48,003
4,382,165
3,106,954
0
0
10,956,976
0
10,956,976
10,956,976
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
942,412
1,184,054
67,085
2,791,746
942,394
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
942,412
1,184,054
67,085
2,791,746
942,394
44
942,412
1,184,054
67,085
2,791,746
942,394
0
0
5,927,736
0
5,927,736
5,927,736
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
189
4,479,892
6,743,062
537,452
15,142,940
5,158,261
0
0
0
0
0
0
189
4,479,892
6,743,062
537,452
15,142,940
5,158,261
189
4,479,892
6,743,062
537,452
15,142,940
5,158,261
0
0
32,061,796
0
32,061,796
32,061,796
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
757
12,067,609
18,192,171
1,301,390
41,487,043
14,467,580
0
0
0
0
0
0
757
12,067,609
18,192,171
1,301,390
41,487,043
14,467,580
757
12,067,609
18,192,171
1,301,390
41,487,043
14,467,580
0
0
87,516,549
0
87,516,549
87,516,549
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
132,867
242,929
20,126
466,178
160,489
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
132,867
242,929
20,126
466,178
160,489
5
132,867
242,929
20,126
466,178
160,489
0
0
1,022,592
0
1,022,592
1,022,592
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
156
2,278,317
3,829,915
270,710
7,523,810
2,501,833
0
0
0
0
0
0
156
2,278,317
3,829,915
270,710
7,523,810
2,501,833
156
2,278,317
3,829,915
270,710
7,523,810
2,501,833
0
0
16,404,742
0
16,404,742
16,404,742
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
1,372,758
1,825,895
82,203
4,032,088
1,394,890
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
1,372,758
1,825,895
82,203
4,032,088
1,394,890
56
1,372,758
1,825,895
82,203
4,032,088
1,394,890
0
0
8,707,890
0
8,707,890
8,707,890
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
158
10,985,306
11,037,608
122,583
19,336,968
5,930,496
0
0
0
0
0
0
158
10,985,306
11,037,608
122,583
19,336,968
5,930,496
158
10,985,306
11,037,608
122,583
19,336,968
5,930,496
0
0
47,413,118
0
47,413,118
47,413,118
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
222
331,463
200,341
4,954,004
0
0
0
0
222
331,463
200,341
4,954,004
222
331,463
200,341
4,954,004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70896
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Western ..................................................................
0
0
240,985
0
240,985
240,985
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
5,727,015
0
5,727,015
5,727,015
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
418,395
665,304
25,144
1,180,225
449,271
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
418,395
665,304
25,144
1,180,225
449,271
11
418,395
665,304
25,144
1,180,225
449,271
0
0
2,738,350
0
2,738,350
2,738,350
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
716,707
1,216,575
58,528
2,617,835
984,819
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
716,707
1,216,575
58,528
2,617,835
984,819
36
716,707
1,216,575
58,528
2,617,835
984,819
0
0
5,594,500
0
5,594,500
5,594,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
169,213
284,571
19,451
564,437
193,607
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
169,213
284,571
19,451
564,437
193,607
25
169,213
284,571
19,451
564,437
193,607
0
0
1,231,303
0
1,231,303
1,231,303
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
551,961
834,009
36,663
1,724,252
523,221
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
551,961
834,009
36,663
1,724,252
523,221
46
551,961
834,009
36,663
1,724,252
523,221
0
0
3,670,153
0
3,670,153
3,670,153
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
2,716,714
3,757,134
313,218
15,617,778
3,697,822
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
2,716,714
3,757,134
313,218
15,617,778
3,697,822
13
2,716,714
3,757,134
313,218
15,617,778
3,697,822
0
0
26,102,678
0
26,102,678
26,102,678
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
194
1,859,957
1,909,903
237,434
6,082,726
1,648,771
0
0
0
0
0
0
194
1,859,957
1,909,903
237,434
6,082,726
1,648,771
194
1,859,957
1,909,903
237,434
6,082,726
1,648,771
0
0
11,738,984
0
11,738,984
11,738,984
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73
1,160,185
1,660,306
24,729
3,408,801
897,215
0
0
0
0
0
0
73
1,160,185
1,660,306
24,729
3,408,801
897,215
73
1,160,185
1,660,306
24,729
3,408,801
897,215
0
0
7,151,308
0
7,151,308
7,151,308
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
671,562
989,851
14,625
1,832,450
699,086
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
671,562
989,851
14,625
1,832,450
699,086
5
671,562
989,851
14,625
1,832,450
699,086
0
0
4,207,579
0
4,207,579
4,207,579
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,181
36,970,389
63,618,726
0
0
0
2,181
36,970,389
63,618,726
2,181
36,970,389
63,618,726
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00200
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70897
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,266,173
78,991,981
48,034,871
0
0
0
3,266,173
78,991,981
48,034,871
3,266,173
78,991,981
48,034,871
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total Costs for Effective Communication—Employee:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
0
0
230,884,322
0
230,884,322
230,884,322
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,201
79,938,482
119,499,404
6,445,514
212,137,427
91,032,564
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,201
79,938,482
119,499,404
6,445,514
212,137,427
91,032,564
4,201
79,938,482
119,499,404
6,445,514
212,137,427
91,032,564
Total ................................................................
0
0
509,057,592
0
509,057,592
509,057,592
Total Costs for Requirements at or Above the Initial Heat Trigger
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,582
290,531
162,505
1,935
260,422
232,476
2,874
323,438
180,911
2,155
289,919
258,807
94
6,809,497
4,152,610
177,064
12,814,196
8,976,858
7
404,901
237,681
12,822
656,948
540,871
2,668
6,695,127
4,077,434
166,177
12,417,670
8,668,463
2,961
6,728,034
4,095,840
166,397
12,447,167
8,694,794
950,451
1,058,104
32,930,319
1,853,230
32,027,540
32,135,193
1,461
134,180
167,855
2,606
154,057
105,242
1,626
149,378
186,868
2,901
171,507
117,162
130
2,916,552
3,586,270
229,181
7,783,534
2,788,761
11
192,713
233,237
17,414
455,300
175,934
1,580
2,858,020
3,520,888
214,373
7,482,291
2,718,069
1,745
2,873,218
3,539,901
214,668
7,499,741
2,729,990
565,401
629,442
17,304,428
1,074,608
16,795,222
16,859,262
10,503
1,231,606
1,835,684
39,669
1,635,856
1,092,042
11,693
1,371,104
2,043,603
44,162
1,821,141
1,215,732
408
12,451,003
18,279,032
1,785,332
38,770,869
13,661,407
19
471,143
662,753
110,509
1,465,601
486,073
10,892
13,211,467
19,451,963
1,714,492
38,941,123
14,267,375
12,082
13,350,965
19,659,882
1,718,985
39,126,409
14,391,066
5,845,359
6,507,436
84,948,051
3,196,098
87,597,312
88,259,388
12,220
849,091
1,238,890
22,189
1,151,743
680,610
13,604
945,263
1,379,213
24,702
1,282,196
757,700
2,022
36,031,537
52,226,855
4,473,869
110,480,523
38,361,839
146
1,981,743
2,713,220
316,331
5,326,300
2,109,291
14,097
34,898,885
50,752,525
4,179,726
106,305,966
36,933,159
15,481
34,995,057
50,892,848
4,182,239
106,436,419
37,010,248
Subtotal ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
3,954,742
4,402,677
241,576,645
12,447,030
233,084,357
233,532,292
185
22,582
43,947
834
32,751
21,418
206
25,140
48,924
928
36,461
23,843
14
403,678
715,273
67,476
1,271,287
463,272
1
26,160
44,171
5,105
71,699
27,878
198
400,100
715,048
63,205
1,232,339
456,811
219
402,658
720,026
63,299
1,236,049
459,237
Subtotal ...........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
121,717
135,503
2,921,000
175,014
2,867,703
2,881,489
3,686
222,053
359,816
6,309
286,418
214,983
4,104
247,204
400,571
7,023
318,859
239,333
517
7,611,700
12,350,876
981,924
22,550,982
8,126,642
43
486,523
749,784
71,000
1,239,668
470,473
4,161
7,347,230
11,960,908
917,233
21,597,731
7,871,153
4,578
7,372,381
12,001,663
917,948
21,630,172
7,895,503
1,093,265
1,217,094
51,622,642
3,017,490
49,698,416
49,822,245
1,889
205,609
267,329
3,235
240,626
163,386
2,103
228,897
297,609
3,601
267,880
181,892
166
4,223,953
5,448,766
281,687
11,104,039
4,085,617
14
270,743
334,958
21,315
619,854
245,395
2,041
4,158,818
5,381,138
263,607
10,724,811
4,003,608
2,255
4,182,107
5,411,417
263,973
10,752,066
4,022,114
Subtotal ...........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00201
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70898
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Total annualized
0%
2%
882,074
981,982
25,144,229
1,492,279
24,534,023
24,633,932
4,850
1,719,680
1,583,237
4,686
1,247,724
717,440
5,399
1,914,460
1,762,563
5,216
1,389,048
798,701
505
35,071,755
34,664,298
421,914
55,965,834
18,107,217
44
2,377,413
2,300,305
31,866
3,255,437
1,149,563
5,311
34,414,022
33,947,231
394,734
53,958,122
17,675,095
5,861
34,608,802
34,126,557
395,264
54,099,446
17,756,356
Subtotal ...........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
5,277,616
5,875,387
144,231,525
9,114,627
140,394,515
140,992,285
2,991
34,495
20,770
173,902
19,853
3,329
38,402
23,123
193,599
22,102
675
1,106,175
654,966
14,164,399
773,687
53
68,368
38,729
712,463
47,365
3,612
1,072,303
637,008
13,625,838
746,174
3,951
1,076,210
639,360
13,645,535
748,423
Subtotal ...........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
252,011
280,555
16,699,902
866,978
16,084,935
16,113,480
918
78,862
116,555
1,164
82,930
58,555
1,022
87,795
129,757
1,295
92,323
65,188
31
1,320,012
2,043,229
88,403
3,383,667
1,353,434
2
72,566
107,332
5,897
166,330
69,675
947
1,326,308
2,052,452
83,669
3,300,268
1,342,314
1,051
1,335,240
2,065,653
83,801
3,309,661
1,348,946
338,985
377,380
8,188,776
421,802
8,105,958
8,144,354
1,859
132,718
214,995
2,769
161,072
130,096
2,069
147,751
239,347
3,082
179,315
144,831
84
2,197,203
3,620,509
215,391
7,439,929
2,873,505
3
64,438
99,687
11,385
232,966
78,479
1,940
2,265,483
3,735,818
206,774
7,368,035
2,925,122
2,150
2,280,515
3,760,169
207,088
7,386,279
2,939,857
Subtotal ...........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
643,508
716,396
16,346,621
486,958
16,503,172
16,576,059
611
21,357
34,579
595
27,406
18,751
680
23,776
38,496
663
30,510
20,874
82
569,105
927,727
70,706
1,692,411
618,635
7
37,017
57,240
5,160
92,667
37,314
686
553,445
905,066
66,142
1,627,150
600,072
756
555,864
908,983
66,209
1,630,254
602,196
Subtotal ...........................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
103,299
115,000
3,878,665
229,404
3,752,560
3,764,261
737
38,996
58,352
687
52,550
30,905
820
43,413
64,961
765
58,502
34,405
148
1,726,267
2,512,631
120,644
4,789,275
1,552,793
14
131,585
181,905
9,689
311,184
110,416
871
1,633,679
2,389,078
111,641
4,530,641
1,473,282
954
1,638,096
2,395,687
111,719
4,536,593
1,476,783
Subtotal ...........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
182,227
202,867
10,701,758
744,793
10,139,192
10,159,832
463
422,316
540,161
12,627
870,470
433,572
516
470,150
601,342
14,057
969,064
482,681
42
9,038,626
12,043,713
1,109,256
46,512,648
11,638,266
4
595,228
750,212
80,182
2,603,480
701,290
502
8,865,714
11,833,661
1,041,701
44,779,638
11,370,549
555
8,913,548
11,894,842
1,043,131
44,878,232
11,419,658
Subtotal ...........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2,279,609
2,537,809
80,342,552
4,730,396
77,891,765
78,149,965
6,145
310,575
301,312
7,536
362,051
166,893
6,841
345,752
335,440
8,390
403,059
185,797
566
5,901,892
5,909,047
850,115
17,538,094
4,833,527
41
322,053
309,850
57,626
855,821
257,881
6,670
5,890,413
5,900,509
800,025
17,044,323
4,742,540
7,366
5,925,590
5,934,637
800,879
17,085,331
4,761,443
Subtotal ...........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
1,154,512
1,285,278
35,033,240
1,803,272
34,384,480
34,515,247
998
64,438
88,068
396
79,812
38,290
1,111
71,736
98,044
441
88,852
42,627
200
3,391,657
4,721,144
84,957
8,888,807
2,493,560
17
223,584
300,127
7,120
517,973
156,305
1,181
3,232,511
4,509,085
78,232
8,450,646
2,375,546
1,294
3,239,809
4,519,060
78,277
8,459,686
2,379,883
Subtotal ...........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Annual cost
savings
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00202
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70899
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.24—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE INITIAL HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...........................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
Subtotal ...........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
2%
Annual cost
savings
Total annualized
0%
2%
272,003
302,811
19,580,325
1,205,126
18,647,201
18,678,009
201
102,280
148,725
674
126,638
86,989
224
113,864
165,570
750
140,981
96,842
14
2,085,718
3,022,555
51,470
5,223,716
2,088,531
1
114,415
161,913
3,564
258,305
107,782
214
2,073,583
3,009,367
48,580
5,092,049
2,067,739
237
2,085,167
3,026,212
48,656
5,106,393
2,077,591
465,506
518,232
12,472,005
645,980
12,291,531
12,344,257
81,107
6,985,646
11,318,161
167,674
6,932,221
6,490,124
90,294
7,776,877
12,600,116
186,666
7,717,400
7,225,230
6,898
123,758,429
204,704,352
11,950,120
234,999,127
151,142,547
644
8,086,368
12,848,409
843,852
12,729,398
9,528,648
87,362
122,657,706
203,174,104
11,273,942
229,201,949
148,104,024
96,548
123,448,937
204,456,059
11,292,933
229,987,129
148,839,129
Subtotal ...........................................................
Total:
Alaskan ..................................................................
Central ....................................................................
Eastern ...................................................................
Pacific .....................................................................
Southern .................................................................
Western ..................................................................
31,974,933
35,596,583
726,561,474
44,037,320
714,499,087
718,120,736
133,406
12,867,014
18,500,941
275,584
13,878,649
10,701,625
148,516
14,324,399
20,596,455
306,798
15,450,618
11,913,748
12,598
256,614,758
371,583,854
22,959,508
605,373,338
273,940,099
1,069
15,926,958
22,131,513
1,610,839
31,571,395
16,300,630
144,935
253,554,813
367,953,282
21,624,253
587,680,592
268,341,094
160,045
255,012,199
370,048,796
21,655,467
589,252,561
269,553,217
Total ................................................................
56,357,219
62,740,535
1,530,484,155
87,542,404
1,499,298,970
1,505,682,286
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
E. Requirements at or Above the High
Heat Trigger
I. Rest Breaks
All affected establishments would
need to provide affected employees with
rest breaks when the high heat trigger is
met or exceeded. These rest breaks are
different from those at the initial heat
trigger in that they are scheduled,
reoccurring at least every two hours.
Employees would still be allowed rest
breaks if needed as outlined under the
initial heat trigger requirements,
although OSHA estimates that these ifneeded rest breaks would be shorter
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded because affected employees
would also receive scheduled rest
breaks (refer to section VIII.C.IV.E.I. for
more details on the time estimated for
high heat trigger rest breaks).
Similar to the initial heat trigger rest
breaks, OSHA calculated total high heat
trigger rest break costs by estimating the
number of hours by work shift type
(daytime, evening, and overnight) in a
given State that meets or exceeds the
high heat trigger and normalizing these
estimates to 8-hour work shift
equivalents. These 8-hour work shift
equivalents are then multiplied by the
number of affected employees and the
unit costs for both indoor and outdoor
work conditions.
As discussed in section VIII.C.IV.E.I.,
and detailed further in appendix A at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the end of this section, OSHA estimates
that under the proposed standard, the
reduction in time spent on pacing (i.e.,
the increase in worker efficiency) will
partially offset the added cost of time
spent on if-needed rest breaks as well as
scheduled rest breaks when the high
heat trigger is met or exceeded for
employees in Group 1 (i.e., currently
noncompliant with if-needed rest breaks
as well as scheduled rest breaks). OSHA
also estimates that reduced pacing (i.e.,
increase in worker efficiency) will
partially offset the added cost of
scheduled rest breaks when the high
heat trigger is met or exceeded for
employees in Group 2 (i.e., that are
currently noncompliant with only
scheduled rest breaks and currently
compliant with if-needed rest breaks).
Combining this estimated partial offset
of the unit costs of rest breaks required
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded with data on the industrylevel and/or State-level number of inscope employees (discussed in section
VIII.B.), baseline non-compliance rates
(discussed in section VIII.C.II.A.), and
State-level exposure to temperatures at
or above the high heat trigger (discussed
in section VIII.C.II.C.), OSHA estimates
that approximately 71.72 percent of the
total cost of compliance with rest breaks
when the high heat trigger is met or
exceeded (approximately $9.92 billion
out of $13.83 billion) could be offset by
PO 00000
Frm 00203
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
avoided labor productivity losses due to
pacing (i.e., avoided losses in worker
efficiency).
II. Observation for Signs and Symptoms
OSHA calculates the total costs for
observing signs and symptoms when the
high heat trigger is met or exceeded by
multiplying the unit costs for both the
designated person and at-risk worker by
the number of affected employees and
the number of 8-hour work shift
equivalents. The method to calculate the
number of work-shift equivalents is the
same approach used in the calculation
of total costs for rest breaks.
III. Hazard Alert
OSHA also calculates the total costs
for notifying employees of high heat
conditions using 8-hour work shift
equivalents. OSHA multiplies these 8hour work shift equivalents by the
number of affected establishments and
the corresponding unit cost for a
designated person to perform this
requirement.
IV. Warning Signs for Excessively High
Heat Areas
OSHA assumed that the cost of
placing warning signs for excessively
high heat areas is only applicable to
industries assumed to have radiant heat
sources (as outlined in OSHA, 2024c
and discussed in section VIII.C.IV.E.IV.).
To calculate total costs of this provision,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70900
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
OSHA multiplies the number of affected
establishments with radiant heat
sources by the unit cost for a warning
sign. Similarly, OSHA multiplies the
number of affected establishments by
the unit cost for a designated person to
place that warning sign in an
excessively high heat area.
Table VIII.C.25. shows the annualized
one-time, annual, and total annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category and region,
discounted (2 percent over a 10-year
period) and undiscounted. Note that the
best available evidence OSHA employed
in this analysis showed no days
exceeding the high heat trigger in
Alaska and therefore, the agency
estimated that most industries in Alaska
will not have costs of compliance for
requirements at or above the high heat
trigger. This may understate the effects
in establishments where employees are
exposed to process heat. However,
OSHA identified no data that would
allow an adjustment for this
consideration but welcomes comment
on the issue.
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Annual cost
savings
Total annualized
0%
2%
Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—Indoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
$0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
$10,576,482
8,784,224
138,806
47,848,109
6,577,885
$8,053,295
6,685,916
105,610
36,415,246
5,037,349
$2,523,187
2,098,307
33,196
11,432,863
1,540,536
$2,523,187
2,098,307
33,196
11,432,863
1,540,536
0
0
73,925,505
56,297,416
17,628,090
17,628,090
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,303,121
16,643,764
420,880
68,319,209
6,134,338
7,086,386
12,668,300
320,205
51,995,293
4,688,454
2,216,735
3,975,464
100,675
16,323,916
1,445,885
2,216,735
3,975,464
100,675
16,323,916
1,445,885
0
0
100,821,312
76,758,637
24,062,675
24,062,675
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60,520,663
134,221,171
4,437,895
511,271,461
52,350,165
46,100,638
102,165,211
3,376,261
389,110,577
39,989,637
14,420,026
32,055,959
1,061,634
122,160,884
12,360,528
14,420,026
32,055,959
1,061,634
122,160,884
12,360,528
0
0
762,801,355
580,742,324
182,059,030
182,059,030
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70,052,483
159,083,213
4,895,384
618,272,678
63,400,197
53,357,614
121,101,655
3,724,409
470,546,413
48,418,585
16,694,869
37,981,559
1,170,975
147,726,264
14,981,612
16,694,869
37,981,559
1,170,975
147,726,264
14,981,612
0
0
915,703,956
697,148,676
218,555,280
218,555,280
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,543,453
4,226,300
152,778
13,967,752
1,365,680
1,175,718
3,216,917
116,231
10,630,371
1,043,429
367,735
1,009,383
36,547
3,337,381
322,251
367,735
1,009,383
36,547
3,337,381
322,251
0
0
21,255,963
16,182,666
5,073,297
5,073,297
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,258,311
29,789,561
877,456
98,622,223
9,857,882
8,576,633
22,677,209
667,554
75,057,866
7,529,435
2,681,678
7,112,351
209,902
23,564,358
2,328,447
2,681,678
7,112,351
209,902
23,564,358
2,328,447
0
0
150,405,433
114,508,696
35,896,737
35,896,737
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,180,429
24,027,523
468,728
91,248,519
9,080,801
9,277,696
18,289,697
356,611
69,446,128
6,936,248
2,902,733
5,737,826
112,117
21,802,391
2,144,553
2,902,733
5,737,826
112,117
21,802,391
2,144,553
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
137,006,001
104,306,380
32,699,620
32,699,620
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
144,486,598
208,190,782
935,094
593,557,344
47,373,376
110,031,414
158,448,947
711,392
451,731,773
36,217,813
34,455,184
49,741,835
223,702
141,825,572
11,155,562
34,455,184
49,741,835
223,702
141,825,572
11,155,562
Subtotal .........................................................
0
0
994,543,195
757,141,340
237,401,855
237,401,855
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00204
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70901
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
2%
Annual cost
savings
Total annualized
0%
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,667,275
1,374,956
75,216,238
939,050
1,270,325
1,046,323
57,244,908
716,692
396,950
328,634
17,971,330
222,358
396,950
328,634
17,971,330
222,358
0
0
79,197,520
60,278,247
18,919,272
18,919,272
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,723,031
8,437,591
135,720
26,176,215
2,784,618
2,835,752
6,422,458
103,249
19,921,838
2,127,847
887,279
2,015,134
32,471
6,254,377
656,770
887,279
2,015,134
32,471
6,254,377
656,770
0
0
41,257,175
31,411,144
9,846,030
9,846,030
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,665,130
11,919,186
237,458
44,104,195
4,864,366
3,553,632
9,072,587
180,652
33,566,359
3,716,150
1,111,498
2,846,599
56,806
10,537,836
1,148,216
1,111,498
2,846,599
56,806
10,537,836
1,148,216
0
0
65,790,335
50,089,379
15,700,955
15,700,955
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,230,874
2,949,063
92,266
10,641,076
997,007
937,606
2,244,815
70,195
8,098,531
761,835
293,268
704,248
22,070
2,542,545
235,171
293,268
704,248
22,070
2,542,545
235,171
0
0
15,910,286
12,112,982
3,797,303
3,797,303
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,853,408
11,279,180
206,445
38,488,372
3,629,760
3,697,024
8,585,138
157,053
29,292,248
2,771,557
1,156,384
2,694,041
49,392
9,196,124
858,203
1,156,384
2,694,041
49,392
9,196,124
858,203
0
0
58,457,165
44,503,020
13,954,145
13,954,145
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25,313,302
62,178,214
2,126,287
426,178,792
29,005,005
19,287,681
47,326,395
1,617,581
324,351,948
22,159,171
6,025,621
14,851,819
508,707
101,826,844
6,845,833
6,025,621
14,851,819
508,707
101,826,844
6,845,833
0
0
544,801,600
414,742,776
130,058,824
130,058,824
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,351,018
20,126,557
1,051,426
107,284,179
9,283,022
10,169,447
15,318,830
799,912
81,650,279
7,087,575
3,181,571
4,807,727
251,514
25,633,900
2,195,447
3,181,571
4,807,727
251,514
25,633,900
2,195,447
0
0
151,096,202
115,026,042
36,070,160
36,070,160
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,982,072
16,193,659
115,621
58,183,741
4,643,754
6,079,447
12,325,758
87,979
44,281,543
3,546,260
1,902,625
3,867,901
27,642
13,902,198
1,097,494
1,902,625
3,867,901
27,642
13,902,198
1,097,494
0
0
87,118,847
66,320,986
20,797,860
20,797,860
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,749,473
16,298,484
102,820
49,918,912
5,276,312
5,903,019
12,405,449
78,225
37,991,496
4,032,474
1,846,455
3,893,035
24,596
11,927,417
1,243,838
1,846,455
3,893,035
24,596
11,927,417
1,243,838
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
79,346,001
60,410,661
18,935,340
18,935,340
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
303,342,032
803,385,621
17,129,327
1,850,916,061
283,757,707
231,097,706
611,525,275
13,031,481
1,408,664,889
216,816,012
72,244,327
191,860,345
4,097,846
442,251,172
66,941,695
72,244,327
191,860,345
4,097,846
442,251,172
66,941,695
Subtotal .........................................................
0
0
3,258,530,748
2,481,135,363
777,395,385
777,395,385
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00205
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70902
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Total Costs for Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—
Indoor:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Total ..............................................................
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
693,799,156
1,539,109,050
33,524,391
4,730,215,075
541,320,924
7,537,968,597
Annual cost
savings
Total annualized
0%
2%
528,491,032
1,171,526,881
25,504,598
3,599,997,704
413,596,523
5,739,116,737
165,308,125
367,582,169
8,019,793
1,130,217,372
127,724,401
1,798,851,859
165,308,125
367,582,169
8,019,793
1,130,217,372
127,724,401
1,798,851,859
Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—Outdoor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30,421,837
25,905,352
401,164
139,227,176
18,824,524
20,207,084
17,200,149
266,259
92,433,271
12,575,462
10,214,753
8,705,204
134,906
46,793,905
6,249,063
10,214,753
8,705,204
134,906
46,793,905
6,249,063
0
0
214,780,053
142,682,223
72,097,830
72,097,830
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,468,916
10,027,967
255,772
43,109,868
3,801,057
3,634,104
6,658,390
169,751
28,620,964
2,534,221
1,834,811
3,369,577
86,021
14,488,903
1,266,836
1,834,811
3,369,577
86,021
14,488,903
1,266,836
0
0
62,663,579
41,617,431
21,046,149
21,046,149
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,882,754
13,027,811
433,257
48,771,686
5,042,717
3,909,101
8,650,431
287,536
32,379,881
3,360,397
1,973,653
4,377,380
145,722
16,391,805
1,682,319
1,973,653
4,377,380
145,722
16,391,805
1,682,319
0
0
73,158,225
48,587,346
24,570,879
24,570,879
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
132,944,386
293,649,877
9,517,395
1,169,092,863
121,291,239
88,332,828
195,001,930
6,316,496
776,171,055
80,799,556
44,611,559
98,647,947
3,200,899
392,921,808
40,491,683
44,611,559
98,647,947
3,200,899
392,921,808
40,491,683
0
0
1,726,495,760
1,146,621,865
579,873,896
579,873,896
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
504,941
1,382,635
49,982
4,569,552
446,782
335,534
918,064
33,171
3,033,762
297,780
169,407
464,571
16,811
1,535,790
149,002
169,407
464,571
16,811
1,535,790
149,002
0
0
6,953,891
4,618,311
2,335,580
2,335,580
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25,722,284
66,910,496
2,078,513
221,198,874
22,088,210
17,093,146
44,432,777
1,379,437
146,855,494
14,716,664
8,629,138
22,477,719
699,076
74,343,380
7,371,546
8,629,138
22,477,719
699,076
74,343,380
7,371,546
0
0
337,998,378
224,477,518
113,520,859
113,520,859
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10,028,628
19,822,596
393,120
73,735,754
7,565,618
6,663,497
13,162,703
260,906
48,953,791
5,041,201
3,365,131
6,659,893
132,214
24,781,963
2,524,416
3,365,131
6,659,893
132,214
24,781,963
2,524,416
0
0
111,545,715
74,082,098
37,463,618
37,463,618
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
33,375,481
50,014,418
284,377
152,996,536
11,220,859
22,171,602
33,205,559
188,727
101,574,747
7,484,528
11,203,879
16,808,859
95,651
51,421,789
3,736,331
11,203,879
16,808,859
95,651
51,421,789
3,736,331
0
0
247,891,671
164,625,163
83,266,508
83,266,508
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,987,040
2,472,347
138,600,039
1,985,344
1,641,236
92,018,389
1,001,697
831,110
46,581,650
1,001,697
831,110
46,581,650
Frm 00206
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70903
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Total annualized
0%
2%
Western ................................................................
0
0
1,710,867
1,139,088
571,779
571,779
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
145,770,293
96,784,057
48,986,237
48,986,237
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,054,541
6,863,635
115,557
21,099,271
2,207,011
2,029,561
4,557,461
76,687
14,007,996
1,471,109
1,024,980
2,306,173
38,870
7,091,276
735,902
1,024,980
2,306,173
38,870
7,091,276
735,902
0
0
33,340,014
22,142,814
11,197,200
11,197,200
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,372,352
16,280,661
323,230
59,913,596
6,637,770
4,234,424
10,810,418
214,513
39,777,337
4,423,522
2,137,928
5,470,244
108,717
20,136,259
2,214,248
2,137,928
5,470,244
108,717
20,136,259
2,214,248
0
0
89,527,609
59,460,214
30,067,395
30,067,395
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,445,654
3,664,148
117,244
13,100,478
1,172,994
960,612
2,433,075
77,811
8,697,486
781,984
485,042
1,231,073
39,433
4,402,992
391,010
485,042
1,231,073
39,433
4,402,992
391,010
0
0
19,500,518
12,950,968
6,549,550
6,549,550
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,034,928
9,377,005
171,635
31,997,519
3,017,642
2,681,188
6,226,155
113,903
21,243,470
2,010,016
1,353,740
3,150,850
57,732
10,754,049
1,007,626
1,353,740
3,150,850
57,732
10,754,049
1,007,626
0
0
48,598,728
32,274,732
16,323,997
16,323,997
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,933,584
31,769,349
1,086,406
217,751,879
14,819,823
8,596,785
21,094,027
720,978
144,568,138
9,876,648
4,336,798
10,675,322
365,428
73,183,741
4,943,175
4,336,798
10,675,322
365,428
73,183,741
4,943,175
0
0
278,361,040
184,856,576
93,504,464
93,504,464
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17,389,771
25,857,112
1,401,978
139,702,133
12,071,618
11,555,006
17,168,009
930,441
92,749,396
8,039,763
5,834,765
8,689,103
471,537
46,952,737
4,031,855
5,834,765
8,689,103
471,537
46,952,737
4,031,855
0
0
196,422,612
130,442,615
65,979,997
65,979,997
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,068,721
22,460,044
159,839
80,684,859
6,429,129
7,354,144
14,913,008
106,099
53,567,225
4,282,922
3,714,577
7,547,036
53,740
27,117,634
2,146,208
3,714,577
7,547,036
53,740
27,117,634
2,146,208
0
0
120,802,593
80,223,398
40,579,195
40,579,195
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,247,215
6,829,456
43,084
20,917,223
2,210,901
2,157,740
4,534,583
28,594
13,887,092
1,473,997
1,089,476
2,294,873
14,491
7,030,131
736,905
1,089,476
2,294,873
14,491
7,030,131
736,905
0
0
33,247,880
22,082,005
11,165,875
11,165,875
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
246,952,116
727,561,870
16,378,766
1,291,042,547
262,677,028
164,137,970
483,115,960
10,869,733
857,129,196
175,094,081
82,814,146
244,445,911
5,509,033
433,913,351
87,582,947
82,814,146
244,445,911
5,509,033
433,913,351
87,582,947
0
0
2,544,612,328
1,690,346,939
854,265,389
854,265,389
0
0
0
0
553,835,149
1,333,876,779
368,039,670
885,723,935
185,795,480
448,152,844
185,795,480
448,152,844
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Rest Breaks at High Heat Trigger—
Outdoor:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00207
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70904
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
33,211,320
3,867,511,852
503,235,789
22,041,040
2,567,668,689
335,402,938
11,170,280
1,299,843,163
167,832,851
11,170,280
1,299,843,163
167,832,851
Total ..............................................................
0
0
6,291,670,889
4,178,876,272
2,112,794,617
2,112,794,617
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
559,511
406,548
6,788
2,084,391
909,503
0
0
0
0
0
559,511
406,548
6,788
2,084,391
909,503
559,511
406,548
6,788
2,084,391
909,503
0
0
3,966,740
0
3,966,740
3,966,740
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
207,109
297,661
7,987
1,133,972
255,007
0
0
0
0
0
207,109
297,661
7,987
1,133,972
255,007
207,109
297,661
7,987
1,133,972
255,007
0
0
1,901,736
0
1,901,736
1,901,736
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
836,294
1,474,289
52,685
5,113,140
1,225,216
0
0
0
0
0
836,294
1,474,289
52,685
5,113,140
1,225,216
836,294
1,474,289
52,685
5,113,140
1,225,216
0
0
8,701,625
0
8,701,625
8,701,625
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,502,225
4,636,411
153,665
16,364,447
3,765,603
0
0
0
0
0
2,502,225
4,636,411
153,665
16,364,447
3,765,603
2,502,225
4,636,411
153,665
16,364,447
3,765,603
0
0
27,422,352
0
27,422,352
27,422,352
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28,691
62,646
2,402
187,883
44,171
0
0
0
0
0
28,691
62,646
2,402
187,883
44,171
28,691
62,646
2,402
187,883
44,171
0
0
325,794
0
325,794
325,794
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
610,504
1,284,623
40,324
3,782,727
861,380
0
0
0
0
0
610,504
1,284,623
40,324
3,782,727
861,380
610,504
1,284,623
40,324
3,782,727
861,380
0
0
6,579,558
0
6,579,558
6,579,558
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
296,626
477,300
9,812
1,627,494
378,264
0
0
0
0
0
296,626
477,300
9,812
1,627,494
378,264
296,626
477,300
9,812
1,627,494
378,264
0
0
2,789,495
0
2,789,495
2,789,495
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,815,756
3,309,944
17,507
9,185,471
1,892,238
0
0
0
0
0
2,815,756
3,309,944
17,507
9,185,471
1,892,238
2,815,756
3,309,944
17,507
9,185,471
1,892,238
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
17,220,917
0
17,220,917
17,220,917
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
71,167
43,763
2,287,363
57,779
0
0
0
0
71,167
43,763
2,287,363
57,779
71,167
43,763
2,287,363
57,779
Subtotal .........................................................
0
0
2,460,073
0
2,460,073
2,460,073
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00208
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70905
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Observation for Signs and Symptoms—Designated Person:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
103,744
192,372
3,375
535,190
138,225
0
0
0
0
0
103,744
192,372
3,375
535,190
138,225
103,744
192,372
3,375
535,190
138,225
0
0
972,907
0
972,907
972,907
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
171,128
349,544
7,457
1,169,540
304,739
0
0
0
0
0
171,128
349,544
7,457
1,169,540
304,739
171,128
349,544
7,457
1,169,540
304,739
0
0
2,002,408
0
2,002,408
2,002,408
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45,838
92,339
3,032
295,978
66,648
0
0
0
0
0
45,838
92,339
3,032
295,978
66,648
45,838
92,339
3,032
295,978
66,648
0
0
503,834
0
503,834
503,834
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
116,889
215,275
4,305
674,933
138,645
0
0
0
0
0
116,889
215,275
4,305
674,933
138,645
116,889
215,275
4,305
674,933
138,645
0
0
1,150,047
0
1,150,047
1,150,047
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
724,251
1,296,067
48,819
8,228,325
1,330,859
0
0
0
0
0
724,251
1,296,067
48,819
8,228,325
1,330,859
724,251
1,296,067
48,819
8,228,325
1,330,859
0
0
11,628,319
0
11,628,319
11,628,319
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
466,232
554,960
31,866
2,752,408
508,720
0
0
0
0
0
466,232
554,960
31,866
2,752,408
508,720
466,232
554,960
31,866
2,752,408
508,720
0
0
4,314,186
0
4,314,186
4,314,186
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
193,162
321,518
2,267
1,055,740
186,661
0
0
0
0
0
193,162
321,518
2,267
1,055,740
186,661
193,162
321,518
2,267
1,055,740
186,661
0
0
1,759,348
0
1,759,348
1,759,348
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
174,882
290,194
1,963
819,396
217,114
0
0
0
0
0
174,882
290,194
1,963
819,396
217,114
174,882
290,194
1,963
819,396
217,114
0
0
1,503,548
0
1,503,548
1,503,548
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,619,024
16,120,110
379,699
31,249,924
12,562,661
0
0
0
0
0
7,619,024
16,120,110
379,699
31,249,924
12,562,661
7,619,024
16,120,110
379,699
31,249,924
12,562,661
0
0
67,931,418
0
67,931,418
67,931,418
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17,543,033
31,425,564
773,951
88,548,322
24,843,433
0
0
0
0
0
17,543,033
31,425,564
773,951
88,548,322
24,843,433
17,543,033
31,425,564
773,951
88,548,322
24,843,433
Frm 00209
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70906
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Total ..............................................................
2%
0
0
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
163,134,305
0%
2%
0
163,134,305
163,134,305
Observation for Signs and Symptoms—At-Risk Worker
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
601,783
437,263
7,300
2,241,869
978,217
0
0
0
0
0
601,783
437,263
7,300
2,241,869
978,217
601,783
437,263
7,300
2,241,869
978,217
0
0
4,266,431
0
4,266,431
4,266,431
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
254,972
366,669
9,837
1,398,311
314,304
0
0
0
0
0
254,972
366,669
9,837
1,398,311
314,304
254,972
366,669
9,837
1,398,311
314,304
0
0
2,344,092
0
2,344,092
2,344,092
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,191,647
2,100,615
74,334
7,309,702
1,744,049
0
0
0
0
0
1,191,647
2,100,615
74,334
7,309,702
1,744,049
1,191,647
2,100,615
74,334
7,309,702
1,744,049
0
0
12,420,346
0
12,420,346
12,420,346
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,298,568
6,157,847
201,444
21,599,905
4,969,725
0
0
0
0
0
3,298,568
6,157,847
201,444
21,599,905
4,969,725
3,298,568
6,157,847
201,444
21,599,905
4,969,725
0
0
36,227,490
0
36,227,490
36,227,490
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36,171
78,978
3,028
236,867
55,687
0
0
0
0
0
36,171
78,978
3,028
236,867
55,687
36,171
78,978
3,028
236,867
55,687
0
0
410,732
0
410,732
410,732
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
622,110
1,306,100
41,405
3,849,145
876,430
0
0
0
0
0
622,110
1,306,100
41,405
3,849,145
876,430
622,110
1,306,100
41,405
3,849,145
876,430
0
0
6,695,191
0
6,695,191
6,695,191
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
373,959
601,737
12,370
2,051,800
476,882
0
0
0
0
0
373,959
601,737
12,370
2,051,800
476,882
373,959
601,737
12,370
2,051,800
476,882
0
0
3,516,748
0
3,516,748
3,516,748
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,952,264
3,470,410
18,356
9,630,782
1,983,974
0
0
0
0
0
2,952,264
3,470,410
18,356
9,630,782
1,983,974
2,952,264
3,470,410
18,356
9,630,782
1,983,974
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
18,055,786
0
18,055,786
18,055,786
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80,025
49,232
2,578,365
65,098
0
0
0
0
80,025
49,232
2,578,365
65,098
80,025
49,232
2,578,365
65,098
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
0
0
2,772,721
0
2,772,721
2,772,721
0
0
0
0
0
0
113,937
211,272
3,706
0
0
0
113,937
211,272
3,706
113,937
211,272
3,706
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00210
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70907
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
587,771
151,805
0
0
587,771
151,805
587,771
151,805
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
1,068,492
0
1,068,492
1,068,492
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
185,509
379,348
8,045
1,268,180
331,134
0
0
0
0
0
185,509
379,348
8,045
1,268,180
331,134
185,509
379,348
8,045
1,268,180
331,134
0
0
2,172,216
0
2,172,216
2,172,216
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45,151
90,957
2,986
291,545
65,650
0
0
0
0
0
45,151
90,957
2,986
291,545
65,650
45,151
90,957
2,986
291,545
65,650
0
0
496,289
0
496,289
496,289
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
151,517
279,051
5,581
874,884
179,719
0
0
0
0
0
151,517
279,051
5,581
874,884
179,719
151,517
279,051
5,581
874,884
179,719
0
0
1,490,753
0
1,490,753
1,490,753
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
713,404
1,276,657
48,088
8,105,101
1,310,928
0
0
0
0
0
713,404
1,276,657
48,088
8,105,101
1,310,928
713,404
1,276,657
48,088
8,105,101
1,310,928
0
0
11,454,178
0
11,454,178
11,454,178
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
512,038
609,483
34,996
3,022,823
558,700
0
0
0
0
0
512,038
609,483
34,996
3,022,823
558,700
512,038
609,483
34,996
3,022,823
558,700
0
0
4,738,041
0
4,738,041
4,738,041
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
310,601
516,996
3,645
1,697,613
300,148
0
0
0
0
0
310,601
516,996
3,645
1,697,613
300,148
310,601
516,996
3,645
1,697,613
300,148
0
0
2,829,003
0
2,829,003
2,829,003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
192,063
318,704
2,156
899,899
238,445
0
0
0
0
0
192,063
318,704
2,156
899,899
238,445
192,063
318,704
2,156
899,899
238,445
0
0
1,651,267
0
1,651,267
1,651,267
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,855,541
21,006,382
487,706
39,335,004
16,443,906
0
0
0
0
0
9,855,541
21,006,382
487,706
39,335,004
16,443,906
9,855,541
21,006,382
487,706
39,335,004
16,443,906
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Observation for Signs and Symptoms—At-Risk Worker:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
87,128,538
0
87,128,538
87,128,538
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,491,261
39,257,702
964,984
106,979,565
31,044,802
0
0
0
0
0
21,491,261
39,257,702
964,984
106,979,565
31,044,802
21,491,261
39,257,702
964,984
106,979,565
31,044,802
Total ..............................................................
0
0
199,738,313
0
199,738,313
199,738,313
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:20 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00211
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70908
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
Initial Hazard Alert—Supervisor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
71,187
38,887
525
67,550
23,579
0
0
0
0
0
71,187
38,887
525
67,550
23,579
71,187
38,887
525
67,550
23,579
0
0
201,728
0
201,728
201,728
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,975
13,148
215
12,095
8,884
0
0
0
0
0
8,975
13,148
215
12,095
8,884
8,975
13,148
215
12,095
8,884
0
0
43,316
0
43,316
43,316
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
67,932
113,247
2,165
83,089
71,282
0
0
0
0
0
67,932
113,247
2,165
83,089
71,282
67,932
113,247
2,165
83,089
71,282
0
0
337,715
0
337,715
337,715
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
94,901
139,158
2,136
103,318
55,542
0
0
0
0
0
94,901
139,158
2,136
103,318
55,542
94,901
139,158
2,136
103,318
55,542
0
0
395,055
0
395,055
395,055
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,638
14,483
114
8,547
6,139
0
0
0
0
0
5,638
14,483
114
8,547
6,139
5,638
14,483
114
8,547
6,139
0
0
34,922
0
34,922
34,922
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30,364
49,428
719
34,796
30,665
0
0
0
0
0
30,364
49,428
719
34,796
30,665
30,364
49,428
719
34,796
30,665
0
0
145,973
0
145,973
145,973
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49,834
66,053
794
53,651
42,009
0
0
0
0
0
49,834
66,053
794
53,651
42,009
49,834
66,053
794
53,651
42,009
0
0
212,341
0
212,341
212,341
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18,064
20,957
167
15,718
14,869
0
0
0
0
0
18,064
20,957
167
15,718
14,869
18,064
20,957
167
15,718
14,869
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
69,774
0
69,774
69,774
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,981
6,913
0
47,995
0
0
0
0
12,981
6,913
0
47,995
12,981
6,913
0
47,995
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
6,619
0
6,619
6,619
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,791
31,359
331
23,087
14,795
0
0
0
0
0
24,791
31,359
331
23,087
14,795
24,791
31,359
331
23,087
14,795
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00212
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70909
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
0%
2%
0
0
94,363
0
94,363
94,363
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20,673
31,001
389
20,185
17,180
0
0
0
0
0
20,673
31,001
389
20,185
17,180
20,673
31,001
389
20,185
17,180
0
0
89,428
0
89,428
89,428
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,900
2,742
42
1,990
1,343
0
0
0
0
0
1,900
2,742
42
1,990
1,343
1,900
2,742
42
1,990
1,343
0
0
8,016
0
8,016
8,016
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,853
9,379
102
8,239
5,748
0
0
0
0
0
6,853
9,379
102
8,239
5,748
6,853
9,379
102
8,239
5,748
0
0
30,322
0
30,322
30,322
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,784
5,332
51
4,527
3,253
0
0
0
0
0
3,784
5,332
51
4,527
3,253
3,784
5,332
51
4,527
3,253
0
0
16,947
0
16,947
16,947
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99,748
89,795
1,119
91,342
35,838
0
0
0
0
0
99,748
89,795
1,119
91,342
35,838
99,748
89,795
1,119
91,342
35,838
0
0
317,842
0
317,842
317,842
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,409
20,570
141
23,071
11,751
0
0
0
0
0
16,409
20,570
141
23,071
11,751
16,409
20,570
141
23,071
11,751
0
0
71,942
0
71,942
71,942
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,066
10,200
129
10,013
7,574
0
0
0
0
0
8,066
10,200
129
10,013
7,574
8,066
10,200
129
10,013
7,574
0
0
35,982
0
35,982
35,982
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
781,190
1,221,415
18,719
969,956
778,728
0
0
0
0
0
781,190
1,221,415
18,719
969,956
778,728
781,190
1,221,415
18,719
969,956
778,728
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Initial Hazard Alert—Supervisor:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
3,770,009
0
3,770,009
3,770,009
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,323,291
1,884,066
27,858
1,579,170
1,135,797
0
0
0
0
0
1,323,291
1,884,066
27,858
1,579,170
1,135,797
1,323,291
1,884,066
27,858
1,579,170
1,135,797
Total ..............................................................
0
0
5,950,182
0
5,950,182
5,950,182
0
0
149,209
88,960
149,209
88,960
Subsequent Hazard Alert—Supervisor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:20 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
0
0
Frm 00213
0
0
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
149,209
88,960
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70910
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,530
568,001
38,555
0
0
0
1,530
568,001
38,555
1,530
568,001
38,555
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
846,254
0
846,254
846,254
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16,253
25,292
626
115,252
24,002
0
0
0
0
0
16,253
25,292
626
115,252
24,002
16,253
25,292
626
115,252
24,002
0
0
181,424
0
181,424
181,424
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
120,142
218,769
6,307
781,907
195,280
0
0
0
0
0
120,142
218,769
6,307
781,907
195,280
120,142
218,769
6,307
781,907
195,280
0
0
1,322,405
0
1,322,405
1,322,405
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
164,418
279,925
6,223
990,737
131,620
0
0
0
0
0
164,418
279,925
6,223
990,737
131,620
164,418
279,925
6,223
990,737
131,620
0
0
1,572,922
0
1,572,922
1,572,922
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10,046
26,309
332
80,016
17,282
0
0
0
0
0
10,046
26,309
332
80,016
17,282
10,046
26,309
332
80,016
17,282
0
0
133,985
0
133,985
133,985
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
54,037
98,530
2,096
336,231
84,009
0
0
0
0
0
54,037
98,530
2,096
336,231
84,009
54,037
98,530
2,096
336,231
84,009
0
0
574,904
0
574,904
574,904
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
88,347
132,539
2,313
506,615
115,861
0
0
0
0
0
88,347
132,539
2,313
506,615
115,861
88,347
132,539
2,313
506,615
115,861
0
0
845,675
0
845,675
845,675
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30,252
39,098
487
141,837
39,037
0
0
0
0
0
30,252
39,098
487
141,837
39,037
30,252
39,098
487
141,837
39,037
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
250,711
0
250,711
250,711
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26,387
10,013
420,050
11,239
0
0
0
0
26,387
10,013
420,050
11,239
26,387
10,013
420,050
11,239
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
467,689
0
467,689
467,689
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47,695
58,857
965
194,296
37,304
0
0
0
0
0
47,695
58,857
965
194,296
37,304
47,695
58,857
965
194,296
37,304
0
0
339,116
0
339,116
339,116
0
0
0
0
35,170
60,614
0
0
35,170
60,614
35,170
60,614
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00214
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70911
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,133
188,542
44,903
0
0
0
1,133
188,542
44,903
1,133
188,542
44,903
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
330,363
0
330,363
330,363
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,271
5,309
121
18,021
3,586
0
0
0
0
0
3,271
5,309
121
18,021
3,586
3,271
5,309
121
18,021
3,586
0
0
30,308
0
30,308
30,308
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,587
19,110
298
73,609
15,550
0
0
0
0
0
12,587
19,110
298
73,609
15,550
12,587
19,110
298
73,609
15,550
0
0
121,154
0
121,154
121,154
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,407
11,059
149
41,583
9,367
0
0
0
0
0
6,407
11,059
149
41,583
9,367
6,407
11,059
149
41,583
9,367
0
0
68,566
0
68,566
68,566
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
184,544
184,968
3,259
842,960
83,587
0
0
0
0
0
184,544
184,968
3,259
842,960
83,587
184,544
184,968
3,259
842,960
83,587
0
0
1,299,318
0
1,299,318
1,299,318
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30,683
44,025
411
201,775
29,334
0
0
0
0
0
30,683
44,025
411
201,775
29,334
30,683
44,025
411
201,775
29,334
0
0
306,228
0
306,228
306,228
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,139
22,380
377
87,373
21,292
0
0
0
0
0
15,139
22,380
377
87,373
21,292
15,139
22,380
377
87,373
21,292
0
0
146,561
0
146,561
146,561
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,389,956
2,433,884
54,538
9,127,069
2,149,829
0
0
0
0
0
1,389,956
2,433,884
54,538
9,127,069
2,149,829
1,389,956
2,433,884
54,538
9,127,069
2,149,829
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Subsequent Hazard Alert—Supervisor:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
15,155,276
0
15,155,276
15,155,276
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,384,543
3,759,640
81,165
14,715,873
3,051,637
0
0
0
0
0
2,384,543
3,759,640
81,165
14,715,873
3,051,637
2,384,543
3,759,640
81,165
14,715,873
3,051,637
Total ..............................................................
0
0
23,992,858
0
23,992,858
23,992,858
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
564
44,703
77,765
1,463
57,794
627
49,766
86,573
1,629
64,340
Warning Signs
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:20 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
I
PO 00000
564
44,703
77,765
1,463
57,794
Frm 00215
627
49,766
86,573
1,629
64,340
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
I
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70912
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Western ................................................................
49,059
54,616
0
0
49,059
54,616
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
231,347
257,551
0
0
231,347
257,551
151
10,082
16,073
257
12,900
6,793
168
11,224
17,893
286
14,361
7,563
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
151
10,082
16,073
257
12,900
6,793
168
11,224
17,893
286
14,361
7,563
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
46,255
51,494
0
0
46,255
51,494
20
2,516
6,463
51
3,814
2,740
22
2,801
7,195
57
4,246
3,050
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
2,516
6,463
51
3,814
2,740
22
2,801
7,195
57
4,246
3,050
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
15,604
17,371
0
0
15,604
17,371
11
2,626
3,808
18
2,320
939
12
2,924
4,239
20
2,583
1,046
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
2,626
3,808
18
2,320
939
12
2,924
4,239
20
2,583
1,046
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
9,722
10,824
0
0
9,722
10,824
40
2,629
2,729
39
2,972
1,688
44
2,927
3,038
44
3,309
1,879
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
2,629
2,729
39
2,972
1,688
44
2,927
3,038
44
3,309
1,879
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
10,097
11,240
0
0
10,097
11,240
13
3,739
4,182
28
3,298
2,854
14
4,162
4,656
32
3,672
3,177
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
3,739
4,182
28
3,298
2,854
14
4,162
4,656
32
3,672
3,177
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
14,114
15,713
0
0
14,114
15,713
10
736
499
1,582
253
11
819
555
1,761
281
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
736
499
1,582
253
11
819
555
1,761
281
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
3,079
3,428
0
0
3,079
3,428
20
56
137
5
208
55
23
63
153
6
231
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
56
137
5
208
55
23
63
153
6
231
62
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
482
536
0
0
482
536
79
2,710
3,593
3
3,300
1,554
88
3,017
4,000
3
3,673
1,730
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79
2,710
3,593
3
3,300
1,554
88
3,017
4,000
3
3,673
1,730
11,240
12,513
0
0
11,240
12,513
8
681
1,759
19
9
758
1,958
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
681
1,759
19
9
758
1,958
22
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00216
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70913
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
804
1,388
895
1,546
0
0
0
0
804
1,388
895
1,546
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Warning Signs:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Total ..............................................................
4,659
5,187
0
0
4,659
5,187
915
70,478
117,007
1,884
88,991
67,324
346,599
1,019
78,460
130,260
2,098
99,071
74,949
385,857
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
915
70,478
117,007
1,884
88,991
67,324
346,599
1,019
78,460
130,260
2,098
99,071
74,949
385,857
Signage Placement
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
116
9,215
16,044
303
11,913
10,122
129
10,259
17,862
337
13,262
11,268
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
116
9,215
16,044
303
11,913
10,122
129
10,259
17,862
337
13,262
11,268
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
47,714
53,118
0
0
47,714
53,118
73
4,761
7,589
125
6,167
3,500
82
5,301
8,449
139
6,866
3,896
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73
4,761
7,589
125
6,167
3,500
82
5,301
8,449
139
6,866
3,896
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
22,216
24,732
0
0
22,216
24,732
7
846
2,172
17
1,282
921
8
941
2,419
19
1,427
1,025
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
846
2,172
17
1,282
921
8
941
2,419
19
1,427
1,025
Subtotal .........................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
5,245
5,839
0
0
5,245
5,839
4
883
1,280
6
780
316
4
983
1,425
7
868
352
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
883
1,280
6
780
316
4
983
1,425
7
868
352
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
3,268
3,638
0
0
3,268
3,638
13
884
917
13
999
567
15
984
1,021
15
1,112
632
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
884
917
13
999
567
15
984
1,021
15
1,112
632
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
3,394
3,778
0
0
3,394
3,778
6
1,615
1,806
12
1,425
1,233
6
1,798
2,011
14
1,586
1,372
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
1,615
1,806
12
1,425
1,233
6
1,798
2,011
14
1,586
1,372
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
6,096
6,787
0
0
6,096
6,787
4
275
187
592
95
4
306
208
659
105
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
275
187
592
95
4
306
208
659
105
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ................................................................
1,152
1,282
0
0
1,152
1,282
8
9
0
0
8
9
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00217
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70914
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
Total annualized
Annual cost
savings
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
21
51
2
78
21
23
57
2
86
23
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
51
2
78
21
23
57
2
86
23
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
180
201
0
0
180
201
46
1,572
2,084
2
1,914
901
51
1,750
2,320
2
2,130
1,003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
1,572
2,084
2
1,914
901
51
1,750
2,320
2
2,130
1,003
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
6,518
7,256
0
0
6,518
7,256
5
402
1,039
11
475
820
5
448
1,156
13
528
913
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
402
1,039
11
475
820
5
448
1,156
13
528
913
Subtotal .........................................................
Total Costs for Signage Placement:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Total ..............................................................
2,751
3,063
0
0
2,751
3,063
281
20,474
33,170
492
25,623
18,495
98,534
312
22,793
36,927
547
28,525
20,590
109,694
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
281
20,474
33,170
492
25,623
18,495
98,534
312
22,793
36,927
547
28,525
20,590
109,694
Total Costs for Requirements at or above the High Heat Trigger
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
42,380,008
35,661,233
556,114
192,037,096
27,352,262
28,260,379
23,886,065
371,868
128,848,517
17,612,811
14,119,630
11,775,168
184,245
63,188,579
9,739,451
14,119,630
11,775,168
184,245
63,188,579
9,739,451
0
0
297,986,712
198,979,639
99,007,073
99,007,073
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,259,345
27,374,501
695,315
114,088,707
10,537,593
10,720,490
19,326,690
489,955
80,616,258
7,222,675
4,538,855
8,047,810
205,360
33,472,449
3,314,918
4,538,855
8,047,810
205,360
33,472,449
3,314,918
0
0
167,955,460
118,376,068
49,579,392
49,579,392
680
53,918
93,809
1,767
69,707
59,181
757
60,025
104,434
1,967
77,602
65,884
0
68,619,433
151,155,901
5,006,642
573,330,985
60,628,710
0
50,009,739
110,815,642
3,663,797
421,490,458
43,350,035
680
18,663,611
40,434,069
1,344,612
151,910,234
17,337,856
757
18,669,718
40,444,694
1,344,812
151,918,129
17,344,559
Subtotal .........................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
279,061
310,669
858,741,671
629,329,670
229,691,061
229,722,669
224
14,843
23,662
382
19,067
10,293
249
16,524
26,342
425
21,226
11,459
0
209,056,982
463,946,432
14,776,247
1,826,423,948
193,613,925
0
141,690,442
316,103,585
10,040,905
1,246,717,469
129,218,140
224
67,381,383
147,866,509
4,735,724
579,725,546
64,406,078
249
67,383,064
147,869,189
4,735,767
579,727,706
64,407,244
Subtotal .........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
68,470
76,226
2,707,817,534
1,843,770,540
864,115,464
864,123,220
27
3,362
8,636
68
5,096
3,660
30
3,742
9,614
76
5,674
4,075
0
2,128,940
5,791,351
208,637
19,050,617
1,935,742
0
1,511,252
4,134,982
149,402
13,664,133
1,341,209
27
621,050
1,665,005
59,303
5,391,581
598,194
30
621,431
1,665,983
59,311
5,392,158
598,608
Subtotal .........................................................
20,849
23,210
29,115,287
20,800,977
8,335,159
8,337,520
Subtotal .........................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal .........................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00218
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70915
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Total annualized
0%
2%
14
3,509
5,088
24
3,100
1,255
16
3,907
5,664
27
3,451
1,397
0
38,297,610
99,438,739
3,040,514
327,823,997
33,798,576
0
25,669,779
67,109,986
2,046,991
221,913,360
22,246,099
14
12,631,341
32,333,840
993,547
105,913,738
11,553,732
16
12,631,739
32,334,416
993,550
105,914,089
11,553,874
Subtotal .........................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
12,990
14,462
502,399,436
338,986,214
163,426,212
163,427,683
53
3,513
3,646
53
3,971
2,255
59
3,911
4,059
59
4,421
2,511
0
23,017,823
45,127,748
887,136
169,223,833
17,659,435
0
15,941,193
31,452,400
617,516
118,399,919
11,977,449
53
7,080,143
13,678,994
269,672
50,827,885
5,684,241
59
7,080,541
13,679,407
269,678
50,828,335
5,684,496
Subtotal .........................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
13,491
15,019
255,915,975
178,388,478
77,540,988
77,542,516
18
5,353
5,989
41
4,723
4,087
20
5,960
6,667
45
5,258
4,550
0
183,678,416
265,045,610
1,255,989
765,527,687
62,524,352
0
132,203,016
191,654,507
900,119
553,306,520
43,702,341
18
51,480,754
73,397,092
355,911
212,225,890
18,826,098
20
51,481,360
73,397,770
355,916
212,226,425
18,826,561
Subtotal .........................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
20,211
22,500
1,278,032,055
921,766,502
356,285,763
356,288,052
14
1,011
685
2,173
347
16
1,125
763
2,419
387
0
4,844,875
3,957,224
219,150,051
2,790,653
0
3,255,669
2,687,559
149,263,297
1,855,780
14
1,590,217
1,270,351
69,888,927
935,221
16
1,590,331
1,270,429
69,889,173
935,260
Subtotal .........................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
4,231
4,710
230,742,803
157,062,304
73,684,730
73,685,209
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,067,739
15,795,086
259,654
48,615,830
5,333,758
4,865,313
10,979,919
179,937
33,929,834
3,598,956
2,202,426
4,815,167
79,717
14,685,996
1,734,802
2,202,426
4,815,167
79,717
14,685,996
1,734,802
Subtotal .........................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
77,072,067
53,553,958
23,518,109
23,518,109
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,449,963
29,020,353
577,712
106,664,237
12,200,093
7,788,056
19,883,004
395,164
73,343,696
8,139,672
3,661,907
9,137,349
182,548
33,320,541
4,060,421
3,661,907
9,137,349
182,548
33,320,541
4,060,421
0
0
159,912,358
109,549,593
50,362,765
50,362,765
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,772,688
6,804,557
215,690
24,349,088
2,307,226
1,898,218
4,677,890
148,006
16,796,017
1,543,819
874,470
2,126,667
67,684
7,553,071
763,407
874,470
2,126,667
67,684
7,553,071
763,407
0
0
36,449,250
25,063,950
11,385,300
11,385,300
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,176,182
21,179,000
388,366
72,117,556
6,987,064
6,378,212
14,811,293
270,956
50,535,718
4,781,573
2,797,971
6,367,707
117,410
21,581,839
2,205,491
2,797,971
6,367,707
117,410
21,581,839
2,205,491
0
0
109,848,169
76,777,752
33,070,417
33,070,417
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39,694,731
96,536,678
3,309,799
660,310,207
46,479,235
27,884,466
68,420,422
2,338,558
468,920,086
32,035,820
11,810,265
28,116,256
971,241
191,390,121
14,443,415
11,810,265
28,116,256
971,241
191,390,121
14,443,415
0
0
846,330,650
599,599,352
246,731,298
246,731,298
28
77
188
31
86
210
0
32,003,351
47,422,875
0
21,724,453
32,486,839
28
10,278,975
14,936,225
31
10,278,984
14,936,247
Subtotal .........................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Telecommunications:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Annual cost
savings
Subtotal .........................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
Subtotal .........................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00219
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70916
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.25—TOTAL COSTS—REQUIREMENTS AT OR ABOVE THE HIGH HEAT TRIGGER—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
Annual cost
savings
Total annualized
0%
2%
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
7
285
76
8
318
85
2,524,644
253,695,845
22,541,484
1,730,353
174,399,675
15,127,338
794,298
79,296,456
7,414,223
794,299
79,296,488
7,414,231
Subtotal .........................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
662
737
358,188,201
245,468,657
112,720,205
112,720,280
125
4,282
5,677
5
5,213
2,455
139
4,767
6,320
5
5,804
2,734
0
19,601,649
39,556,812
281,923
141,846,798
11,600,777
0
13,433,591
27,238,766
194,078
97,848,768
7,829,182
125
6,172,340
12,323,724
87,850
44,003,243
3,774,051
139
6,172,825
12,324,367
87,850
44,003,834
3,774,329
Subtotal .........................................................
Warehousing:
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
17,758
19,769
212,887,959
146,544,384
66,361,333
66,363,344
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,386,839
23,769,417
150,530
72,652,817
7,971,638
8,060,758
16,940,032
106,818
51,878,587
5,506,470
3,326,081
6,829,384
43,711
20,774,229
2,465,168
3,326,081
6,829,384
43,711
20,774,229
2,465,168
Subtotal .........................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
0
0
115,931,240
82,492,666
33,438,574
33,438,574
13
1,083
2,798
31
1,278
2,208
14
1,206
3,114
34
1,423
2,458
0
569,939,859
1,571,729,282
34,448,756
3,222,640,561
578,369,859
0
395,235,676
1,094,641,235
23,901,214
2,265,794,085
391,910,093
13
174,705,267
477,090,844
10,547,573
956,847,754
186,461,974
14
174,705,390
477,091,161
10,547,576
956,847,899
186,462,224
Subtotal .........................................................
Total:
Alaskan ................................................................
Central ..................................................................
Eastern .................................................................
Pacific ...................................................................
Southern ...............................................................
Western ................................................................
7,410
8,250
5,977,128,316
4,171,482,302
1,805,653,424
1,805,654,264
1,196
90,952
150,177
2,376
114,614
85,819
1,331
101,253
167,187
2,645
127,596
95,539
0
1,290,376,435
2,949,312,800
68,583,668
8,809,549,859
1,104,632,382
0
896,530,702
2,057,250,816
47,545,638
6,167,666,393
748,999,461
1,196
393,936,685
892,212,161
21,040,406
2,641,998,079
355,718,740
1,331
393,946,986
892,229,171
21,040,676
2,642,011,061
355,728,460
Total ..............................................................
445,133
495,551
14,222,455,144
9,917,993,009
4,304,907,268
4,304,957,686
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
F. Heat Illness and Emergency Response
and Planning
All covered employers would be
required to respond when employees
are experiencing signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness or when there is a
heat-related emergency at their work
sites.
OSHA calculates the total costs
associated with responding to heatrelated illnesses by multiplying the
labor-based unit cost by the number of
affected establishments and the number
of heat-related illnesses per
establishment (shown in table VIII.C.6.).
OSHA calculates the total costs
associated with responding to heatrelated emergencies as a sum of total
labor-based costs and capital-based
costs. Total labor-based costs are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
calculated by multiplying the laborbased unit costs by the number of
affected establishments and the number
of heat-related emergencies per
establishment (also shown in table
VIII.C.6.). As discussed in section
VIII.C.IV.F., labor-based unit costs
incurred during heat-related
emergencies consist of reducing an
employee’s body temperature before
emergency medical services arrive as
well as contacting emergency medical
services and transporting employees to
a place where they can be reached by an
emergency medical provider. Total
capital-based costs are calculated by
multiplying the capital-based unit costs
by the number of affected
establishments. As discussed in section
VIII.C.IV.F., capital-based unit costs
consist of ice, ice sheets, and ice
PO 00000
Frm 00220
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
coolers. Cost frequency is assumed to be
one-time for purchases of ice sheets and
ice coolers and the costs of purchasing
ice when the initial heat trigger is met
or exceeded are calculated on an annual
basis. OSHA assumes that ice costs are
incurred only when the initial heat
trigger is met or exceeded. Using this
assumption, OSHA multiplied the
number of 8-hour work shift equivalents
by the number of affected
establishments and the unit cost for ice
to determine the total annual costs
associated with ice purchases.
Table VIII.C.26. shows the annualized
one-time, annual, and total annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category and region,
discounted (2 percent over a 10-year
period) and undiscounted.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70917
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Medical Response—Non-Emergency
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
$0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
0
0
0
0
0
$22
1,561
822
11
1,427
212
$22
1,561
822
11
1,427
212
$22
1,561
822
11
1,427
212
0
0
4,055
4,055
4,055
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
390
608
10
543
342
4
390
608
10
543
342
4
390
608
10
543
342
0
0
1,897
1,897
1,897
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
656
1,098
23
791
561
8
656
1,098
23
791
561
8
656
1,098
23
791
561
0
0
3,136
3,136
3,136
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39
3,014
3,653
54
2,649
726
39
3,014
3,653
54
2,649
726
39
3,014
3,653
54
2,649
726
0
0
10,134
10,134
10,134
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
38
97
1
57
35
0
38
97
1
57
35
0
38
97
1
57
35
0
0
228
228
228
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
1,829
3,022
40
2,154
1,699
22
1,829
3,022
40
2,154
1,699
22
1,829
3,022
40
2,154
1,699
0
0
8,766
8,766
8,766
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
334
442
5
359
231
3
334
442
5
359
231
3
334
442
5
359
231
0
0
1,376
1,376
1,376
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
2,617
2,545
20
1,908
1,440
13
2,617
2,545
20
1,908
1,440
13
2,617
2,545
20
1,908
1,440
0
0
8,544
8,544
8,544
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
671
351
2,546
17
671
351
2,546
17
671
351
2,546
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00221
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70918
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
335
335
335
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
3,921
3,921
3,921
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
799
1,011
11
744
375
19
799
1,011
11
744
375
19
799
1,011
11
744
375
0
0
2,958
2,958
2,958
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
267
401
5
261
175
6
267
401
5
261
175
6
267
401
5
261
175
0
0
1,116
1,116
1,116
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
217
313
5
227
119
6
217
313
5
227
119
6
217
313
5
227
119
0
0
887
887
887
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
696
952
10
837
467
11
696
952
10
837
467
11
696
952
10
837
467
0
0
2,974
2,974
2,974
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
432
609
6
517
306
2
432
609
6
517
306
2
432
609
6
517
306
0
0
1,873
1,873
1,873
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
52
3,215
2,894
36
2,944
726
52
3,215
2,894
36
2,944
726
52
3,215
2,894
36
2,944
726
0
0
9,867
9,867
9,867
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
546
685
5
768
315
13
546
685
5
768
315
13
546
685
5
768
315
0
0
2,332
2,332
2,332
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
260
329
4
323
203
2
260
329
4
323
203
2
260
329
4
323
203
0
0
1,120
1,120
1,120
0
0
0
0
0
0
953
57,371
47,165
953
57,371
47,165
953
57,371
47,165
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00222
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70919
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
435
22,835
19,411
435
22,835
19,411
435
22,835
19,411
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Medical Response—Non-Emergency:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
148,169
148,169
148,169
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,193
74,912
66,997
681
41,890
27,678
1,193
74,912
66,997
681
41,890
27,678
1,193
74,912
66,997
681
41,890
27,678
Total .................................................................................................
0
0
213,352
213,352
213,352
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
15
0
25
4
0
28
15
0
25
4
0
28
15
0
25
4
0
0
72
72
72
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
10
0
9
5
0
6
10
0
9
5
0
6
10
0
9
5
0
0
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
18
0
13
9
0
11
18
0
13
9
0
11
18
0
13
9
0
0
51
51
51
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
53
64
1
47
13
1
53
64
1
47
13
1
53
64
1
47
13
0
0
178
178
178
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
0
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
31
51
1
36
29
0
31
51
1
36
29
0
31
51
1
36
29
0
0
147
147
147
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
7
0
6
4
0
5
7
0
6
4
0
5
7
0
6
4
Medical Response—Emergency
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00223
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70920
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0%
2%
0
0
22
22
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
43
41
0
31
23
0
43
41
0
31
23
0
43
41
0
31
23
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
139
139
139
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
6
45
6
0
12
6
45
6
0
12
6
45
6
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
69
69
69
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
16
0
12
6
0
13
16
0
12
6
0
13
16
0
12
6
0
0
47
47
47
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
7
0
4
3
0
4
7
0
4
3
0
4
7
0
4
3
0
0
18
18
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
5
0
4
2
0
4
5
0
4
2
0
4
5
0
4
2
0
0
15
15
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
15
0
13
7
0
11
15
0
13
7
0
11
15
0
13
7
0
0
48
48
48
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
10
0
9
5
0
7
10
0
9
5
0
7
10
0
9
5
0
0
32
32
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
51
46
1
47
12
1
51
46
1
47
12
1
51
46
1
47
12
0
0
158
158
158
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
11
0
12
5
0
9
11
0
12
5
0
9
11
0
12
5
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00224
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70921
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
2%
0%
2%
0
0
37
37
37
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
5
0
5
3
0
4
5
0
5
3
0
4
5
0
5
3
0
0
18
18
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
914
756
7
369
313
15
914
756
7
369
313
15
914
756
7
369
313
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Medical Response—Emergency:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
2,375
2,375
2,375
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
1,207
1,086
11
688
449
19
1,207
1,086
11
688
449
19
1,207
1,086
11
688
449
Total .................................................................................................
0
0
3,460
3,460
3,460
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
4
1
0
4
2
0
4
1
0
4
2
0
4
1
0
0
12
12
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
0
5
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
0
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
10
0
7
2
0
8
10
0
7
2
0
8
10
0
7
2
0
0
28
28
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
5
Contact Emergency Medical Services
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00225
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70922
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
6
5
8
0
6
5
8
0
6
5
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
24
24
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
5
4
0
2
1
0
5
4
0
2
1
0
5
4
0
0
22
22
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
7
1
0
2
1
7
1
0
2
1
7
1
0
0
11
11
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
2
3
0
2
1
0
0
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
2
1
0
2
2
0
2
1
0
2
2
0
2
1
0
0
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
0
5
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00226
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70923
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
7
0
8
2
8
7
0
8
2
8
7
0
8
2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
25
25
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
2
1
0
1
2
0
2
1
0
1
2
0
2
1
0
0
6
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
146
121
1
59
50
2
146
121
1
59
50
2
146
121
1
59
50
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Contact Emergency Medical Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
380
380
380
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
193
174
2
110
72
3
193
174
2
110
72
3
193
174
2
110
72
Total .................................................................................................
0
0
554
554
554
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
67
35
0
61
9
1
67
35
0
61
9
1
67
35
0
61
9
0
0
173
173
173
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
23
0
21
13
0
15
23
0
21
13
0
15
23
0
21
13
0
0
73
73
73
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
43
1
31
22
0
26
43
1
31
22
0
26
43
1
31
22
0
0
122
122
122
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
127
154
2
112
2
127
154
2
112
2
127
154
2
112
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Transport Worker:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00227
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70924
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
31
31
31
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
427
427
427
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
2
1
0
1
4
0
2
1
0
1
4
0
2
1
0
0
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
74
122
2
87
69
1
74
122
2
87
69
1
74
122
2
87
69
0
0
354
354
354
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
17
0
14
9
0
13
17
0
14
9
0
13
17
0
14
9
0
0
53
53
53
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
102
100
1
75
56
1
102
100
1
75
56
1
102
100
1
75
56
0
0
334
334
334
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
28
15
108
14
1
28
15
108
14
1
28
15
108
14
0
0
166
166
166
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
31
39
0
29
14
1
31
39
0
29
14
1
31
39
0
29
14
0
0
113
113
113
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
16
0
10
7
0
10
16
0
10
7
0
10
16
0
10
7
0
0
43
43
43
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
13
0
9
5
0
9
13
0
9
5
0
9
13
0
9
5
0
0
36
36
36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
37
0
0
27
37
0
0
27
37
0
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00228
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70925
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
2%
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
32
18
32
18
32
18
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
114
114
114
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
25
0
21
12
0
17
25
0
21
12
0
17
25
0
21
12
0
0
76
76
76
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
123
111
1
113
28
2
123
111
1
113
28
2
123
111
1
113
28
0
0
379
379
379
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
26
0
29
12
0
21
26
0
29
12
0
21
26
0
29
12
0
0
89
89
89
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
13
0
12
8
0
10
13
0
12
8
0
10
13
0
12
8
0
0
43
43
43
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
2,194
1,815
17
886
751
36
2,194
1,815
17
886
751
36
2,194
1,815
17
886
751
0
0
5,699
5,699
5,699
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
2,896
2,606
27
1,652
1,079
46
2,896
2,606
27
1,652
1,079
46
2,896
2,606
27
1,652
1,079
0
0
8,305
8,305
8,305
3,919
284,403
149,682
2,022
260,013
38,559
4,363
316,616
166,636
2,251
289,464
42,926
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,919
284,403
149,682
2,022
260,013
38,559
4,363
316,616
166,636
2,251
289,464
42,926
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
738,598
822,255
0
738,598
822,255
409
32,691
46,817
741
42,659
25,237
455
36,393
52,120
825
47,491
28,096
0
0
0
0
0
0
409
32,691
46,817
741
42,659
25,237
455
36,393
52,120
825
47,491
28,096
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
148,554
165,380
0
148,554
165,380
4,919
5,477
0
4,919
5,477
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Transport Worker:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Total .................................................................................................
Ice Sheets.
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing.
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00229
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70926
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
392,047
652,643
12,463
478,939
333,020
436,452
726,565
13,875
533,186
370,740
0
0
0
0
0
392,047
652,643
12,463
478,939
333,020
436,452
726,565
13,875
533,186
370,740
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
1,874,032
2,086,295
0
1,874,032
2,086,295
7,015
538,801
656,231
9,774
478,099
136,369
7,810
599,828
730,559
10,881
532,251
151,815
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,015
538,801
656,231
9,774
478,099
136,369
7,810
599,828
730,559
10,881
532,251
151,815
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
1,826,289
2,033,145
0
1,826,289
2,033,145
159
19,859
51,015
402
30,107
18,521
177
22,109
56,794
447
33,517
20,619
0
0
0
0
0
0
159
19,859
51,015
402
30,107
18,521
177
22,109
56,794
447
33,517
20,619
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
120,063
133,662
0
120,063
133,662
1,015
105,516
171,723
2,503
120,865
86,959
1,130
117,467
191,173
2,786
134,555
96,809
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,015
105,516
171,723
2,503
120,865
86,959
1,130
117,467
191,173
2,786
134,555
96,809
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
488,581
543,921
0
488,581
543,921
1,733
175,535
232,663
2,796
188,980
121,702
1,929
195,417
259,016
3,113
210,385
135,486
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,733
175,535
232,663
2,796
188,980
121,702
1,929
195,417
259,016
3,113
210,385
135,486
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
723,409
805,346
0
723,409
805,346
550
108,365
105,352
841
79,014
59,634
613
120,639
117,284
936
87,964
66,388
0
0
0
0
0
0
550
108,365
105,352
841
79,014
59,634
613
120,639
117,284
936
87,964
66,388
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
353,755
393,824
0
353,755
393,824
784
31,780
17,148
115,134
15,218
873
35,379
19,091
128,175
16,941
0
0
0
0
0
784
31,780
17,148
115,134
15,218
873
35,379
19,091
128,175
16,941
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
180,064
200,459
0
180,064
200,459
1,828
78,479
99,269
1,048
73,083
36,803
2,035
87,368
110,513
1,167
81,361
40,972
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,828
78,479
99,269
1,048
73,083
36,803
2,035
87,368
110,513
1,167
81,361
40,972
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
290,510
323,415
0
290,510
323,415
2,173
86,303
129,160
1,602
84,110
56,791
2,419
96,078
143,789
1,783
93,637
63,223
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,173
86,303
129,160
1,602
84,110
56,791
2,419
96,078
143,789
1,783
93,637
63,223
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
360,139
400,930
0
360,139
400,930
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00230
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70927
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
0%
2%
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
177
6,511
9,397
142
6,819
3,557
197
7,249
10,461
159
7,591
3,960
0
0
0
0
0
0
177
6,511
9,397
142
6,819
3,557
197
7,249
10,461
159
7,591
3,960
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
26,604
29,617
0
26,604
29,617
244
14,806
20,265
221
17,801
9,937
271
16,483
22,560
246
19,818
11,063
0
0
0
0
0
0
244
14,806
20,265
221
17,801
9,937
271
16,483
22,560
246
19,818
11,063
63,274
70,441
0
63,274
70,441
69
12,968
18,273
175
15,516
9,194
76
14,437
20,343
195
17,274
10,236
0
0
0
0
0
0
69
12,968
18,273
175
15,516
9,194
76
14,437
20,343
195
17,274
10,236
56,196
62,561
0
56,196
62,561
5,154
315,763
284,254
3,541
289,153
71,295
5,738
351,528
316,450
3,942
321,904
79,371
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,154
315,763
284,254
3,541
289,153
71,295
5,738
351,528
316,450
3,942
321,904
79,371
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
969,160
1,078,933
0
969,160
1,078,933
783
33,502
41,998
288
47,105
19,317
872
37,297
46,755
320
52,440
21,505
0
0
0
0
0
0
783
33,502
41,998
288
47,105
19,317
872
37,297
46,755
320
52,440
21,505
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
142,993
159,189
0
142,993
159,189
175
25,535
32,288
410
31,697
19,910
194
28,427
35,945
456
35,287
22,165
0
0
0
0
0
0
175
25,535
32,288
410
31,697
19,910
194
28,427
35,945
456
35,287
22,165
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
110,014
122,475
0
110,014
122,475
31,903
2,345,882
3,852,103
60,769
3,037,027
1,978,080
35,517
2,611,589
4,288,412
67,652
3,381,017
2,202,128
0
0
0
0
0
0
31,903
2,345,882
3,852,103
60,769
3,037,027
1,978,080
35,517
2,611,589
4,288,412
67,652
3,381,017
2,202,128
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Ice Sheets:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
11,305,765
12,586,315
0
11,305,765
12,586,315
63,010
4,608,745
6,570,282
99,738
5,396,123
3,040,103
70,146
5,130,756
7,314,467
111,034
6,007,317
3,384,441
0
0
0
0
0
0
63,010
4,608,745
6,570,282
99,738
5,396,123
3,040,103
70,146
5,130,756
7,314,467
111,034
6,007,317
3,384,441
Total .................................................................................................
Ice.
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing.
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
19,778,001
22,018,161
0
19,778,001
22,018,161
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
446
5,904,480
3,256,910
145,592
13,828,413
984,176
446
5,904,480
3,256,910
145,592
13,828,413
984,176
446
5,904,480
3,256,910
145,592
13,828,413
984,176
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00231
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70928
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0%
2%
0
0
24,120,016
24,120,016
24,120,016
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
647,575
912,708
53,375
2,568,554
670,491
46
647,575
912,708
53,375
2,568,554
670,491
46
647,575
912,708
53,375
2,568,554
670,491
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
4,852,749
4,852,749
4,852,749
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
559
7,717,626
12,712,137
897,553
28,462,002
8,930,719
559
7,717,626
12,712,137
897,553
28,462,002
8,930,719
559
7,717,626
12,712,137
897,553
28,462,002
8,930,719
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
58,720,595
58,720,595
58,720,595
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
797
9,565,873
12,957,020
703,866
28,772,465
4,062,547
797
9,565,873
12,957,020
703,866
28,772,465
4,062,547
797
9,565,873
12,957,020
703,866
28,772,465
4,062,547
0
0
56,062,569
56,062,569
56,062,569
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
396,549
954,226
28,916
1,772,663
490,895
18
396,549
954,226
28,916
1,772,663
490,895
18
396,549
954,226
28,916
1,772,663
490,895
0
0
3,643,268
3,643,268
3,643,268
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
115
2,084,690
3,394,782
180,238
7,349,405
2,327,639
115
2,084,690
3,394,782
180,238
7,349,405
2,327,639
115
2,084,690
3,394,782
180,238
7,349,405
2,327,639
0
0
15,336,869
15,336,869
15,336,869
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
197
3,446,620
4,631,181
201,369
11,236,731
3,270,460
197
3,446,620
4,631,181
201,369
11,236,731
3,270,460
197
3,446,620
4,631,181
201,369
11,236,731
3,270,460
0
0
22,786,559
22,786,559
22,786,559
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
63
1,878,565
2,043,899
60,540
4,507,111
1,570,311
63
1,878,565
2,043,899
60,540
4,507,111
1,570,311
63
1,878,565
2,043,899
60,540
4,507,111
1,570,311
0
0
10,060,489
10,060,489
10,060,489
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
89
679,900
310,644
6,186,305
322,752
89
679,900
310,644
6,186,305
322,752
89
679,900
310,644
6,186,305
322,752
0
0
7,499,690
7,499,690
7,499,690
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
208
1,592,194
1,908,549
75,491
3,900,095
957,348
208
1,592,194
1,908,549
75,491
3,900,095
957,348
208
1,592,194
1,908,549
75,491
3,900,095
957,348
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00232
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70929
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
2%
0%
2%
0
0
8,433,885
8,433,885
8,433,885
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
247
1,656,570
2,519,069
115,370
4,946,955
1,503,157
247
1,656,570
2,519,069
115,370
4,946,955
1,503,157
247
1,656,570
2,519,069
115,370
4,946,955
1,503,157
0
0
10,741,370
10,741,370
10,741,370
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
125,786
183,236
10,260
390,745
96,609
20
125,786
183,236
10,260
390,745
96,609
20
125,786
183,236
10,260
390,745
96,609
0
0
806,655
806,655
806,655
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
296,733
407,173
15,899
997,075
267,246
28
296,733
407,173
15,899
997,075
267,246
28
296,733
407,173
15,899
997,075
267,246
0
0
1,984,154
1,984,154
1,984,154
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
249,978
371,092
12,610
896,743
253,049
8
249,978
371,092
12,610
896,743
253,049
8
249,978
371,092
12,610
896,743
253,049
0
0
1,783,480
1,783,480
1,783,480
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
586
6,347,834
5,777,439
255,024
16,735,409
2,032,671
586
6,347,834
5,777,439
255,024
16,735,409
2,032,671
586
6,347,834
5,777,439
255,024
16,735,409
2,032,671
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
31,148,963
31,148,963
31,148,963
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
89
676,799
880,610
20,720
2,564,705
498,202
89
676,799
880,610
20,720
2,564,705
498,202
89
676,799
880,610
20,720
2,564,705
498,202
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
4,641,124
4,641,124
4,641,124
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
517,417
684,456
29,519
1,745,873
539,749
20
517,417
684,456
29,519
1,745,873
539,749
20
517,417
684,456
29,519
1,745,873
539,749
0
0
3,517,034
3,517,034
3,517,034
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,627
47,433,999
76,037,869
4,376,294
178,850,258
52,965,329
3,627
47,433,999
76,037,869
4,376,294
178,850,258
52,965,329
3,627
47,433,999
76,037,869
4,376,294
178,850,258
52,965,329
0
0
359,667,375
359,667,375
359,667,375
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,163
91,219,187
129,943,000
7,182,636
315,711,506
7,163
91,219,187
129,943,000
7,182,636
315,711,506
7,163
91,219,187
129,943,000
7,182,636
315,711,506
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Ice:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00233
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70930
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
2%
0%
2%
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
81,743,351
81,743,351
81,743,351
Total .................................................................................................
Ice Cooler.
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing.
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
0
0
625,806,844
625,806,844
625,806,844
1,555
112,807
59,371
802
103,133
15,294
1,731
125,585
66,096
893
114,815
17,027
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,555
112,807
59,371
802
103,133
15,294
1,731
125,585
66,096
893
114,815
17,027
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
292,962
326,145
0
292,962
326,145
162
12,967
18,570
294
16,921
10,010
180
14,435
20,673
327
18,837
11,144
0
0
0
0
0
0
162
12,967
18,570
294
16,921
10,010
180
14,435
20,673
327
18,837
11,144
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
58,923
65,597
0
58,923
65,597
1,951
155,504
258,869
4,944
189,970
132,091
2,172
173,117
288,189
5,503
211,487
147,053
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,951
155,504
258,869
4,944
189,970
132,091
2,172
173,117
288,189
5,503
211,487
147,053
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
743,329
827,522
0
743,329
827,522
2,783
213,714
260,292
3,877
189,636
54,090
3,098
237,920
289,774
4,316
211,116
60,217
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,783
213,714
260,292
3,877
189,636
54,090
3,098
237,920
289,774
4,316
211,116
60,217
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
724,392
806,440
0
724,392
806,440
63
7,877
20,235
159
11,942
7,346
70
8,769
22,527
177
13,294
8,178
0
0
0
0
0
0
63
7,877
20,235
159
11,942
7,346
70
8,769
22,527
177
13,294
8,178
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
47,623
53,017
0
47,623
53,017
403
41,853
68,113
993
47,941
34,492
448
46,593
75,828
1,105
53,371
38,399
0
0
0
0
0
0
403
41,853
68,113
993
47,941
34,492
448
46,593
75,828
1,105
53,371
38,399
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
193,794
215,744
0
193,794
215,744
687
69,625
92,285
1,109
74,958
48,273
765
77,511
102,738
1,235
83,449
53,740
0
0
0
0
0
0
687
69,625
92,285
1,109
74,958
48,273
765
77,511
102,738
1,235
83,449
53,740
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
286,938
319,438
0
286,938
319,438
218
42,983
41,787
333
31,341
23,653
243
47,851
46,520
371
34,890
26,333
0
0
0
0
0
0
218
42,983
41,787
333
31,341
23,653
243
47,851
46,520
371
34,890
26,333
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
140,316
156,209
0
140,316
156,209
311
12,605
346
14,033
0
0
311
12,605
346
14,033
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00234
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70931
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
2%
0%
2%
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
6,802
45,668
6,036
7,572
50,840
6,720
0
0
0
6,802
45,668
6,036
7,572
50,840
6,720
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
71,422
79,512
0
71,422
79,512
725
31,128
39,375
416
28,988
14,598
807
34,654
43,835
463
32,271
16,251
0
0
0
0
0
0
725
31,128
39,375
416
28,988
14,598
807
34,654
43,835
463
32,271
16,251
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
115,230
128,281
0
115,230
128,281
862
34,232
51,231
635
33,362
22,526
960
38,109
57,034
707
37,141
25,077
0
0
0
0
0
0
862
34,232
51,231
635
33,362
22,526
960
38,109
57,034
707
37,141
25,077
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
142,848
159,027
0
142,848
159,027
70
2,583
3,727
57
2,705
1,411
78
2,875
4,149
63
3,011
1,571
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
2,583
3,727
57
2,705
1,411
78
2,875
4,149
63
3,011
1,571
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
10,552
11,748
0
10,552
11,748
97
5,873
8,038
88
7,061
3,942
108
6,538
8,948
97
7,861
4,388
0
0
0
0
0
0
97
5,873
8,038
88
7,061
3,942
108
6,538
8,948
97
7,861
4,388
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
25,097
27,940
0
25,097
27,940
27
5,144
7,248
69
6,155
3,647
30
5,726
8,069
77
6,852
4,060
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
5,144
7,248
69
6,155
3,647
30
5,726
8,069
77
6,852
4,060
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
22,290
24,815
0
22,290
24,815
2,044
125,246
112,749
1,405
114,692
28,279
2,276
139,432
125,519
1,564
127,682
31,482
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,044
125,246
112,749
1,405
114,692
28,279
2,276
139,432
125,519
1,564
127,682
31,482
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
384,414
427,955
0
384,414
427,955
311
13,289
16,658
114
18,684
7,662
346
14,794
18,545
127
20,800
8,530
0
0
0
0
0
0
311
13,289
16,658
114
18,684
7,662
346
14,794
18,545
127
20,800
8,530
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
56,718
63,142
0
56,718
63,142
69
10,128
12,807
163
12,572
7,897
77
11,275
14,257
181
13,996
8,792
0
0
0
0
0
0
69
10,128
12,807
163
12,572
7,897
77
11,275
14,257
181
13,996
8,792
43,637
48,579
0
43,637
48,579
12,654
14,088
0
12,654
14,088
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00235
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70932
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual
2%
0%
2%
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
930,486
1,527,924
24,104
1,204,627
784,599
1,035,878
1,700,984
26,834
1,341,069
873,467
0
0
0
0
0
930,486
1,527,924
24,104
1,204,627
784,599
1,035,878
1,700,984
26,834
1,341,069
873,467
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total Costs for Ice Cooler:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
4,484,394
4,992,320
0
4,484,394
4,992,320
24,993
1,828,043
2,606,080
39,561
2,140,354
1,205,847
27,823
2,035,097
2,901,259
44,041
2,382,782
1,342,427
0
0
0
0
0
0
24,993
1,828,043
2,606,080
39,561
2,140,354
1,205,847
27,823
2,035,097
2,901,259
44,041
2,382,782
1,342,427
Total .................................................................................................
Total Costs for Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning.
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing.
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
7,844,878
8,733,430
0
7,844,878
8,733,430
5,474
397,210
209,053
2,824
363,147
53,853
6,094
442,200
232,732
3,143
404,279
59,953
468
5,906,140
3,257,783
145,604
13,829,931
984,402
5,942
6,303,350
3,466,836
148,427
14,193,078
1,038,255
6,562
6,348,340
3,490,515
148,747
14,234,210
1,044,354
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
1,031,560
1,148,400
24,124,328
25,155,888
25,272,728
571
45,657
65,387
1,035
59,579
35,248
635
50,828
72,793
1,152
66,328
39,240
51
647,987
913,350
53,385
2,569,128
670,853
622
693,644
978,737
54,421
2,628,707
706,100
686
698,815
986,143
54,538
2,635,456
710,093
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Commercial Kitchens:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
207,477
230,977
4,854,754
5,062,231
5,085,731
6,871
547,551
911,512
17,407
668,909
465,111
7,649
609,570
1,014,754
19,379
744,673
517,792
568
7,718,320
12,713,298
897,577
28,462,838
8,931,312
7,438
8,265,871
13,624,809
914,984
29,131,747
9,396,424
8,216
8,327,889
13,728,052
916,955
29,207,511
9,449,105
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Construction:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
2,617,361
2,913,817
58,723,912
61,341,273
61,637,729
9,798
752,515
916,523
13,651
667,736
190,459
10,908
837,748
1,020,333
15,197
743,367
212,032
839
9,569,076
12,960,902
703,923
28,775,279
4,063,319
10,637
10,321,590
13,877,425
717,574
29,443,015
4,253,778
11,746
10,406,824
13,981,235
719,120
29,518,646
4,275,350
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
2,550,681
2,839,585
56,073,337
58,624,018
58,912,922
222
27,736
71,250
561
42,049
25,867
247
30,878
79,320
624
46,812
28,797
18
396,589
954,328
28,917
1,772,724
490,932
241
424,325
1,025,579
29,477
1,814,773
516,799
266
427,467
1,033,649
29,541
1,819,536
519,729
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
167,685
186,678
3,643,509
3,811,195
3,830,188
1,418
147,368
239,837
3,495
168,806
121,451
1,579
164,060
267,002
3,891
187,926
135,207
139
2,086,628
3,397,985
180,281
7,351,688
2,329,439
1,557
2,233,996
3,637,822
183,777
7,520,494
2,450,890
1,718
2,250,688
3,664,987
184,172
7,539,613
2,464,646
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
682,376
759,665
15,346,160
16,028,535
16,105,825
2,420
245,160
324,948
3,905
263,939
169,974
2,694
272,928
361,754
4,348
293,834
189,226
200
3,446,973
4,631,648
201,375
11,237,111
3,270,705
2,620
3,692,133
4,956,597
205,280
11,501,050
3,440,679
2,895
3,719,902
4,993,402
205,722
11,530,945
3,459,931
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00236
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70933
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Industry category
0%
2%
0%
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Manufacturing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
1,010,347
1,124,784
22,788,013
23,798,360
23,912,797
768
151,348
147,139
1,174
110,355
83,287
856
168,490
163,805
1,307
122,854
92,721
77
1,881,334
2,046,592
60,562
4,509,130
1,571,835
845
2,032,682
2,193,731
61,736
4,619,485
1,655,122
932
2,049,825
2,210,396
61,869
4,631,984
1,664,556
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Oil and Gas:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
494,071
550,032
10,069,529
10,563,601
10,619,562
1,095
44,385
23,950
160,802
21,254
1,219
49,412
26,663
179,015
23,661
108
680,613
311,017
6,189,011
323,109
1,202
724,998
334,968
6,349,813
344,363
1,326
730,025
337,681
6,368,027
346,770
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
251,486
279,971
7,503,858
7,755,344
7,783,829
2,553
109,607
138,644
1,464
102,071
51,401
2,842
122,022
154,348
1,630
113,632
57,223
227
1,593,038
1,909,617
75,502
3,900,882
957,744
2,780
1,702,645
2,048,261
76,966
4,002,953
1,009,145
3,069
1,715,060
2,063,965
77,132
4,014,514
1,014,967
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
405,740
451,696
8,437,011
8,842,751
8,888,707
3,035
120,534
180,391
2,237
117,472
79,316
3,379
134,187
200,823
2,491
130,778
88,300
254
1,656,853
2,519,494
115,376
4,947,232
1,503,343
3,289
1,777,387
2,699,885
117,613
5,064,704
1,582,659
3,632
1,791,040
2,720,317
117,866
5,078,010
1,591,643
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
502,986
559,957
10,742,550
11,245,537
11,302,508
248
9,094
13,124
199
9,524
4,968
276
10,124
14,610
222
10,603
5,531
26
126,016
183,568
10,265
390,986
96,734
274
135,110
196,691
10,464
400,510
101,703
302
136,140
198,178
10,487
401,588
102,266
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Telecommunications:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
37,157
41,365
807,595
844,752
848,960
340
20,679
28,303
308
24,862
13,879
379
23,021
31,508
343
27,678
15,451
40
297,469
408,180
15,910
997,959
267,740
380
318,148
436,483
16,219
1,022,821
281,618
419
320,490
439,688
16,254
1,025,637
283,190
88,371
98,381
1,987,297
2,075,668
2,085,678
96
18,112
25,521
245
21,671
12,841
107
20,163
28,412
272
24,125
14,296
10
250,436
371,738
12,616
897,291
253,374
106
268,548
397,259
12,861
918,962
266,215
117
270,600
400,150
12,888
921,417
267,669
78,486
87,376
1,785,465
1,863,951
1,872,841
7,198
441,009
397,003
4,946
403,844
99,574
8,014
490,960
441,969
5,506
449,586
110,853
641
6,351,231
5,780,498
255,062
16,738,520
2,033,438
7,840
6,792,240
6,177,501
260,008
17,142,365
2,133,012
8,655
6,842,191
6,222,468
260,568
17,188,106
2,144,291
1,353,575
1,506,888
31,159,391
32,512,966
32,666,279
1,094
46,791
58,656
402
65,789
26,979
1,218
52,091
65,300
447
73,240
30,034
103
677,376
881,334
20,725
2,565,516
498,535
1,196
724,167
939,991
21,126
2,631,305
525,513
1,320
729,467
946,634
21,172
2,638,757
528,569
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Temporary Help Services:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total annualized
Annual
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Transportation:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Utilities:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00237
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70934
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.26—TOTAL COSTS—HEAT ILLNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PLANNING—Continued
[2023$]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Warehousing:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
199,711
222,331
4,643,589
4,843,299
4,865,920
244
35,663
45,095
572
44,269
27,808
272
39,702
50,202
637
49,283
30,957
22
517,691
684,804
29,523
1,746,214
539,964
266
553,354
729,898
30,096
1,790,483
567,771
293
557,394
735,006
30,161
1,795,497
570,921
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Non-Core:
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
153,651
171,054
3,518,218
3,671,869
3,689,272
44,558
3,276,369
5,380,026
84,873
4,241,654
2,762,679
49,605
3,647,467
5,989,397
94,486
4,722,086
3,075,595
4,634
47,494,625
76,087,725
4,376,753
178,874,407
52,985,853
49,191
50,770,993
81,467,752
4,461,626
183,116,060
55,748,532
54,238
51,142,092
82,077,122
4,471,239
183,596,492
56,061,448
Subtotal ...................................................................................................
Total.
Alaskan ..........................................................................................................
Central ............................................................................................................
Eastern ...........................................................................................................
Pacific .............................................................................................................
Southern .........................................................................................................
Western ..........................................................................................................
15,790,158
17,578,635
359,823,997
375,614,155
377,402,632
88,002
6,436,788
9,176,362
139,298
7,536,477
4,245,950
97,970
7,165,853
10,215,726
155,076
8,390,099
4,726,869
8,424
91,298,395
130,013,862
7,183,357
315,755,847
81,772,629
96,426
97,735,184
139,190,225
7,322,655
323,292,325
86,018,579
106,394
98,464,248
140,229,588
7,338,433
324,145,946
86,499,498
Total .................................................................................................
27,622,878
30,751,591
626,032,515
653,655,393
656,784,106
Source: OSHA estimate.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
G. Training
All affected establishments would be
required to provide training on heatrelated hazards to at-risk workers and
designated persons both upon
promulgation and periodically
thereafter.79 OSHA calculates the total
costs of each training requirement by
either multiplying the number of
affected establishments by the
corresponding unit costs or multiplying
the number of affected employees by the
corresponding unit costs. The unit costs
to undergo employee trainings (initial,
annual refresher, and supplemental) are
employee-based and are combined with
the number of affected employees. All
other training-related unit costs are
establishment-based (developing,
preparing, conducting employee
training (initial, annual refresher,
supplemental) and supervisor training
(initial, annual refresher)) and are
combined with the number of affected
establishments. OSHA assumes that one
percent of affected establishments
would incur the establishment-based
cost of supplemental trainings annually.
Additionally, OSHA assumes employers
would incur the cost of providing
supplemental training to one percent of
employees annually.
Table VIII.C.27. shows the annualized
one-time, annual, and total annualized
costs for each of these requirements by
industry category, discounted (2 percent
over a 10-year period) and
undiscounted.
TABLE VIII.C.27—TOTAL COSTS—TRAINING
[2023]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Initial Employee Training Development
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
79 Employers would be required to conduct
refresher trainings annually for both at-risk workers
and designated persons. Supplemental trainings
would also be required for at-risk workers when
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
$874,213
196,858
1,551,304
3,520,999
161,955
661,920
965,373
687,852
356,567
429,895
404,065
36,316
138,034
$973,231
219,155
1,727,013
3,919,806
180,299
736,893
1,074,716
765,762
396,953
478,587
449,832
40,430
153,668
either (1) worker(s) heat exposure changes, (2)
policies and procedures change, (3) worker(s) does
not retain information, or (4) a heat-related injury
or illness occurs that results in death, days away
PO 00000
Frm 00238
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
$0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$874,213
196,858
1,551,304
3,520,999
161,955
661,920
965,373
687,852
356,567
429,895
404,065
36,316
138,034
$973,231
219,155
1,727,013
3,919,806
180,299
736,893
1,074,716
765,762
396,953
478,587
449,832
40,430
153,668
from work, medical treatment beyond first aid, or
loss of consciousness.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70935
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.27—TOTAL COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
One-time annualized
Industry category
Total annualized
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
77,023
1,433,544
234,921
164,390
17,129,902
85,747
1,595,915
261,529
183,009
19,070,125
0
0
0
0
0
77,023
1,433,544
234,921
164,390
17,129,902
85,747
1,595,915
261,529
183,009
19,070,125
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
29,025,131
32,312,671
0
29,025,131
32,312,671
Initial Employee Training—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
327,830
73,822
581,739
1,320,375
60,733
248,220
362,015
257,945
133,712
161,211
151,524
13,619
51,763
28,883
537,579
88,095
61,646
6,423,713
364,961
82,183
647,630
1,469,927
67,612
276,335
403,019
287,161
148,857
179,470
168,687
15,161
57,626
32,155
598,468
98,074
68,628
7,151,297
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
327,830
73,822
581,739
1,320,375
60,733
248,220
362,015
257,945
133,712
161,211
151,524
13,619
51,763
28,883
537,579
88,095
61,646
6,423,713
364,961
82,183
647,630
1,469,927
67,612
276,335
403,019
287,161
148,857
179,470
168,687
15,161
57,626
32,155
598,468
98,074
68,628
7,151,297
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
10,884,424
12,117,251
0
10,884,424
12,117,251
Initial Employee Training—At-Risk Worker
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
934,279
746,591
4,066,902
4,331,381
122,360
1,942,964
1,029,589
2,507,091
541,637
361,448
724,272
142,218
420,884
2,505,173
1,356,516
582,011
553,790
53,834,831
1,040,101
831,153
4,527,541
4,821,976
136,219
2,163,034
1,146,206
2,791,058
602,986
402,388
806,307
158,326
468,556
2,788,922
1,510,162
647,932
616,515
59,932,448
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
934,279
746,591
4,066,902
4,331,381
122,360
1,942,964
1,029,589
2,507,091
541,637
361,448
724,272
142,218
420,884
2,505,173
1,356,516
582,011
553,790
53,834,831
1,040,101
831,153
4,527,541
4,821,976
136,219
2,163,034
1,146,206
2,791,058
602,986
402,388
806,307
158,326
468,556
2,788,922
1,510,162
647,932
616,515
59,932,448
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
76,703,936
85,391,828
0
76,703,936
85,391,828
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Initial Supervisor Training Development
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
437,106
98,429
775,652
1,760,499
80,978
330,960
482,687
343,926
178,283
214,948
202,033
18,158
69,017
38,511
716,772
117,460
82,195
8,564,951
486,615
109,577
863,507
1,959,903
90,150
368,446
537,358
382,881
198,477
239,294
224,916
20,215
76,834
42,873
797,958
130,765
91,505
9,535,063
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
437,106
98,429
775,652
1,760,499
80,978
330,960
482,687
343,926
178,283
214,948
202,033
18,158
69,017
38,511
716,772
117,460
82,195
8,564,951
486,615
109,577
863,507
1,959,903
90,150
368,446
537,358
382,881
198,477
239,294
224,916
20,215
76,834
42,873
797,958
130,765
91,505
9,535,063
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
14,512,566
16,156,335
0
14,512,566
16,156,335
0
273,191
304,135
Initial Supervisor Training—Supervisor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00239
Fmt 4701
273,191
Sfmt 4702
304,135
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70936
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.27—TOTAL COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
61,518
484,783
1,100,312
50,611
206,850
301,679
214,954
111,427
134,342
126,270
11,349
43,136
24,070
447,983
73,413
51,372
5,353,094
68,486
539,692
1,224,939
56,344
230,279
335,849
239,301
124,048
149,559
140,572
12,634
48,021
26,796
498,723
81,728
57,190
5,959,414
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61,518
484,783
1,100,312
50,611
206,850
301,679
214,954
111,427
134,342
126,270
11,349
43,136
24,070
447,983
73,413
51,372
5,353,094
68,486
539,692
1,224,939
56,344
230,279
335,849
239,301
124,048
149,559
140,572
12,634
48,021
26,796
498,723
81,728
57,190
5,959,414
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
9,070,353
10,097,710
0
9,070,353
10,097,710
Initial Supervisor Training—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
218,553
49,214
387,826
880,250
40,489
165,480
241,343
171,963
89,142
107,474
101,016
9,079
34,508
19,256
358,386
58,730
41,097
4,282,475
243,308
54,789
431,753
979,951
45,075
184,223
268,679
191,440
99,238
119,647
112,458
10,107
38,417
21,437
398,979
65,382
45,752
4,767,531
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
218,553
49,214
387,826
880,250
40,489
165,480
241,343
171,963
89,142
107,474
101,016
9,079
34,508
19,256
358,386
58,730
41,097
4,282,475
243,308
54,789
431,753
979,951
45,075
184,223
268,679
191,440
99,238
119,647
112,458
10,107
38,417
21,437
398,979
65,382
45,752
4,767,531
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
7,256,283
8,078,168
0
7,256,283
8,078,168
Annual Employee Refresher Training—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,768,652
369,108
2,850,713
527,929
303,666
1,209,995
1,810,074
672,075
806,053
757,622
68,093
258,814
144,417
2,950,027
618,234
308,231
32,061,160
1,768,652
369,108
2,850,713
527,929
303,666
1,209,995
1,810,074
672,075
806,053
757,622
68,093
258,814
144,417
2,950,027
618,234
308,231
32,061,160
1,768,652
369,108
2,850,713
527,929
303,666
1,209,995
1,810,074
672,075
806,053
757,622
68,093
258,814
144,417
2,950,027
618,234
308,231
32,061,160
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
0
0
47,484,865
47,484,865
47,484,865
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,150,895
3,732,953
19,973,908
7,431,366
611,800
9,244,018
5,147,944
2,725,803
1,807,242
3,621,359
711,089
2,104,420
6,150,895
3,732,953
19,973,908
7,431,366
611,800
9,244,018
5,147,944
2,725,803
1,807,242
3,621,359
711,089
2,104,420
6,150,895
3,732,953
19,973,908
7,431,366
611,800
9,244,018
5,147,944
2,725,803
1,807,242
3,621,359
711,089
2,104,420
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Annual Employee Refresher Training—At-Risk Worker
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00240
Fmt 4701
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70937
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.27—TOTAL COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
2%
0%
2%
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,525,865
7,140,067
4,739,454
2,768,949
268,614,044
12,525,865
7,140,067
4,739,454
2,768,949
268,614,044
12,525,865
7,140,067
4,739,454
2,768,949
268,614,044
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
0
0
359,051,175
359,051,175
359,051,175
Annual Supervisor Refresher Training—Supervisor
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,473,877
307,590
2,375,594
439,941
253,055
1,008,329
1,508,395
560,062
671,711
631,352
56,744
215,678
120,348
2,458,356
515,195
256,859
26,717,633
1,473,877
307,590
2,375,594
439,941
253,055
1,008,329
1,508,395
560,062
671,711
631,352
56,744
215,678
120,348
2,458,356
515,195
256,859
26,717,633
1,473,877
307,590
2,375,594
439,941
253,055
1,008,329
1,508,395
560,062
671,711
631,352
56,744
215,678
120,348
2,458,356
515,195
256,859
26,717,633
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
0
0
39,570,721
39,570,721
39,570,721
Annual Supervisor Refresher Training—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,179,102
246,072
1,900,475
351,953
202,444
806,663
1,206,716
448,050
537,369
505,082
45,395
172,542
96,278
1,966,685
412,156
205,487
21,374,107
1,179,102
246,072
1,900,475
351,953
202,444
806,663
1,206,716
448,050
537,369
505,082
45,395
172,542
96,278
1,966,685
412,156
205,487
21,374,107
1,179,102
246,072
1,900,475
351,953
202,444
806,663
1,206,716
448,050
537,369
505,082
45,395
172,542
96,278
1,966,685
412,156
205,487
21,374,107
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
0
0
31,656,577
31,656,577
31,656,577
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Supplemental Employee Refresher Training—Designated Person
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17,687
3,691
28,507
5,279
3,037
12,100
18,101
6,721
8,061
7,576
681
2,588
1,444
29,500
6,182
3,082
320,612
17,687
3,691
28,507
5,279
3,037
12,100
18,101
6,721
8,061
7,576
681
2,588
1,444
29,500
6,182
3,082
320,612
17,687
3,691
28,507
5,279
3,037
12,100
18,101
6,721
8,061
7,576
681
2,588
1,444
29,500
6,182
3,082
320,612
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
0
0
474,849
474,849
474,849
61,509
37,330
199,739
61,509
37,330
199,739
61,509
37,330
199,739
Supplemental Employee Refresher Training—At-Risk Worker
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00241
Fmt 4701
0
0
0
Sfmt 4702
0
0
0
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70938
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.27—TOTAL COSTS—TRAINING—Continued
[2023]
One-time annualized
Total annualized
Industry category
Annual
0%
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
2%
0%
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
74,314
6,118
92,440
51,479
27,258
18,072
36,214
7,111
21,044
125,259
71,401
47,395
27,689
2,686,140
74,314
6,118
92,440
51,479
27,258
18,072
36,214
7,111
21,044
125,259
71,401
47,395
27,689
2,686,140
74,314
6,118
92,440
51,479
27,258
18,072
36,214
7,111
21,044
125,259
71,401
47,395
27,689
2,686,140
0
0
3,590,512
3,590,512
3,590,512
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing .........................................................................
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers ........................................................
Commercial Kitchens ............................................................................................
Construction ..........................................................................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ...............................................................
Landscaping and Facilities Support ......................................................................
Maintenance and Repair .......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................................................
Oil and Gas ...........................................................................................................
Postal and Delivery Services ................................................................................
Recreation and Amusement .................................................................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ............................................................................
Telecommunications .............................................................................................
Temporary Help Services .....................................................................................
Transportation .......................................................................................................
Utilities ...................................................................................................................
Warehousing .........................................................................................................
Non-Core ...............................................................................................................
3,065,172
1,226,431
7,848,207
12,913,815
517,126
3,556,395
3,382,686
4,183,731
1,410,768
1,409,318
1,709,181
230,739
757,342
2,692,916
4,850,780
1,154,630
954,490
95,588,967
3,412,350
1,365,343
8,737,136
14,376,502
575,699
3,959,211
3,765,827
4,657,602
1,570,559
1,568,945
1,902,772
256,874
843,122
2,997,929
5,400,205
1,285,410
1,062,600
106,415,877
10,651,721
4,696,744
27,328,936
8,830,781
1,380,121
12,373,546
9,742,711
0
4,439,969
3,848,509
5,559,205
889,114
2,775,086
13,013,611
14,616,036
6,338,616
3,570,298
351,773,696
13,716,894
5,923,175
35,177,143
21,744,597
1,897,247
15,929,940
13,125,396
4,183,731
5,850,737
5,257,827
7,268,385
1,119,853
3,532,428
15,706,527
19,466,817
7,493,247
4,524,787
447,362,662
14,064,071
6,062,087
36,066,072
23,207,283
1,955,819
16,332,756
13,508,537
4,657,602
6,010,528
5,417,453
7,461,976
1,145,988
3,618,208
16,011,540
20,016,242
7,624,026
4,632,898
458,189,573
Total ...............................................................................................................
147,452,693
164,153,963
481,828,698
629,281,391
645,982,661
Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
Total
Source: OSHA.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
H. Recordkeeping
The proposed standard would require
affected indoor establishments to
maintain environmental measurements
for six months. Certain models of
environmental monitoring equipment
can automatically upload measurements
taken to a recordkeeping database.
OSHA assumes that establishments
required to maintain these records
would purchase a wireless temperature
and humidity data logger with this
capability (cost captured under the
Identifying Heat Hazards provision in
section VIII.C.V.C.). For this reason,
OSHA assumes that establishments
would not incur an additional cost to
maintain these records beyond the time
required to take the measurements
themselves (also captured in section
VIII.C.V.C.).
I. Total Costs of the Proposed Standard
Accounting for the costs associated
with all provisions, OSHA estimates
that annualized costs, using a 2 percent
discount rate over a ten-year period,
would equal 7.8 billion. Table VIII.C.28.
shows the total costs of the proposed
standard by industry category and
region. Table VIII.C.29. shows the total
costs of the proposed standard by
provision.
TABLE VIII.C.28—TOTAL COSTS OF PROPOSED STANDARD BY INDUSTRY CATEGORY AND REGION
[2023]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
One-time
Annual
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0%
Cost savings
2%
0%
2%
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
$382,520
32,095,286
17,835,946
234,288
30,484,939
10,348,543
$25,400
1,874,386
955,385
13,394
1,686,951
953,696
$23,728
1,751,017
892,504
12,512
1,575,919
890,925
$91,573
62,352,975
47,389,145
934,183
225,927,630
41,033,629
$7
28,665,280
24,123,746
384,690
129,505,465
18,153,681
$132,358
37,084,663
25,144,533
574,262
99,639,354
24,010,171
$136,792
37,455,687
25,350,373
576,969
99,991,389
24,131,198
Subtotal ....................................
91,381,522
5,509,211
5,146,605
377,729,135
200,832,869
186,585,339
187,642,407
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00242
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70939
TABLE VIII.C.28—TOTAL COSTS OF PROPOSED STANDARD BY INDUSTRY CATEGORY AND REGION—Continued
[2023]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
One-time
Annual
0%
Cost savings
2%
0%
2%
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
73,244
6,164,179
8,768,769
137,453
8,097,617
5,225,565
6,454
536,834
785,209
12,450
709,966
522,755
6,029
501,500
733,528
11,631
663,237
488,349
22,293
20,645,717
34,605,315
1,020,163
126,957,154
15,565,091
11
10,913,203
19,559,927
507,369
81,071,558
7,398,609
30,252
10,402,615
16,000,785
527,784
46,766,355
8,741,314
31,108
10,474,581
16,103,245
529,391
46,860,912
8,802,592
Subtotal ....................................
28,466,828
2,573,667
2,404,273
198,815,733
119,450,676
82,469,106
82,801,829
Commercial Kitchens
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
549,495
49,420,733
81,115,976
1,643,878
64,789,002
45,955,018
76,847
6,134,657
10,278,954
197,251
7,549,866
6,478,114
71,789
5,730,885
9,602,411
184,268
7,052,947
6,051,736
165,987
102,302,796
205,636,428
8,155,868
658,904,303
95,928,702
19
50,480,882
111,478,395
3,774,306
422,956,059
43,836,108
228,602
57,377,453
103,297,526
4,565,675
243,182,131
57,335,907
235,133
57,961,753
104,257,396
4,585,083
243,946,159
57,882,325
Subtotal ....................................
243,474,102
30,715,689
28,694,036
1,071,094,084
632,525,768
465,987,295
468,867,850
Construction
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
1,970,414
124,809,723
185,264,838
2,828,279
140,183,098
95,685,192
90,248
5,773,126
8,472,733
128,458
6,281,225
5,693,786
84,308
5,393,149
7,915,072
120,003
5,867,806
5,319,031
381,506
276,994,643
563,370,759
20,460,443
1,990,987,667
252,822,597
146
143,672,185
318,816,805
10,357,236
1,252,043,769
131,327,431
587,427
146,380,743
263,927,711
10,398,881
753,590,330
131,633,064
610,106
147,817,492
266,060,003
10,431,429
755,203,238
132,739,616
Subtotal ....................................
550,741,543
26,439,574
24,699,368
3,105,017,615
1,856,217,570
1,306,518,156
1,312,861,883
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
20,363
2,472,950
6,132,138
60,013
3,813,305
2,485,111
3,291
410,674
1,054,962
8,303
622,595
447,179
3,075
383,645
985,526
7,757
581,616
417,746
6,992
3,748,206
9,594,795
324,887
23,397,552
3,716,313
1
1,537,412
4,179,153
154,506
13,735,831
1,369,087
9,356
2,499,157
6,134,352
177,212
10,105,311
2,640,455
9,600
2,528,809
6,208,027
177,925
10,150,992
2,670,391
Subtotal ....................................
14,983,879
2,547,005
2,379,365
40,788,745
20,975,991
21,565,843
21,745,744
Landscaping and Facilities Support
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
197,905
15,928,220
26,916,385
437,568
20,065,797
15,235,305
9,247
910,565
1,487,495
23,090
1,057,656
858,763
8,639
850,633
1,389,590
21,570
988,043
802,240
57,613
52,336,359
122,773,476
4,330,295
363,466,916
48,189,915
43
26,156,301
67,859,770
2,117,991
223,153,028
22,716,571
78,285
27,863,936
57,754,094
2,258,370
142,426,233
27,082,750
80,564
28,047,989
58,064,912
2,263,419
142,657,739
27,258,747
Subtotal ....................................
78,781,181
4,346,816
4,060,716
591,154,573
342,003,705
257,463,668
258,373,369
25,014
2,518,105
3,325,327
40,027
2,709,792
2,114,457
67,597
37,119,880
64,302,224
1,479,871
199,152,349
30,066,027
14
16,211,936
31,787,358
638,831
119,019,773
12,222,844
91,847
23,308,617
35,780,290
880,434
82,852,875
19,752,738
94,399
23,560,779
36,124,066
884,582
83,139,736
19,952,439
10,732,722
332,187,947
179,880,757
162,666,801
163,756,002
Maintenance and Repair
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
215,858
21,311,213
29,094,622
351,104
24,302,282
16,832,123
26,776
2,695,519
3,559,615
42,847
2,900,712
2,263,433
Subtotal ....................................
92,107,202
11,488,901
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Manufacturing
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
208,090
46,722,857
49,352,278
275,775
38,013,636
27,269,499
14,066
2,476,921
2,864,175
22,532
2,135,219
2,028,785
13,141
2,313,895
2,675,660
21,049
1,994,682
1,895,254
32,847
225,799,894
308,082,858
1,788,665
830,736,198
86,192,896
44
134,580,429
193,954,812
931,985
556,561,957
44,851,904
55,019
96,139,443
119,349,692
886,512
278,189,127
44,270,821
57,432
96,678,557
119,920,136
889,725
278,628,229
44,587,803
Subtotal ....................................
161,842,134
9,541,698
8,913,680
1,452,633,359
930,881,129
538,890,613
540,761,882
75,868
53
100,007
102,665
Oil and Gas
Alaskan ............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
230,784
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
11,136
Frm 00243
10,403
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70940
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.C.28—TOTAL COSTS OF PROPOSED STANDARD BY INDUSTRY CATEGORY AND REGION—Continued
[2023]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
One-time
Annual
0%
Cost savings
2%
0%
2%
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
5,254,963
2,946,199
21,685,085
2,771,305
447,260
240,700
1,640,611
239,669
417,823
224,857
1,532,629
223,894
8,133,964
5,775,743
245,969,418
4,717,343
3,324,037
2,726,288
149,975,760
1,903,145
5,380,150
3,368,145
98,326,228
3,115,295
5,441,459
3,402,478
98,578,405
3,147,643
Subtotal ....................................
32,888,335
2,579,376
2,409,606
264,672,336
157,929,282
110,289,825
110,672,651
Postal and Delivery Services
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
223,989
10,250,664
13,819,885
144,635
10,090,918
5,829,356
27,487
1,189,567
1,517,304
16,201
1,136,067
736,437
25,678
1,111,272
1,417,437
15,134
1,061,293
687,966
64,174
12,828,157
23,773,311
465,869
58,865,833
9,319,823
2
4,937,878
11,087,251
185,834
34,096,163
3,668,631
89,319
9,034,302
14,219,778
296,118
25,892,369
6,307,770
91,966
9,155,164
14,382,377
297,821
26,011,207
6,376,742
Subtotal ....................................
40,359,447
4,623,062
4,318,780
105,317,166
53,975,760
55,839,656
56,315,277
Recreation and Amusement
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
210,864
9,811,950
15,803,455
200,532
10,826,402
8,194,447
20,358
843,376
1,264,869
15,892
823,464
700,718
19,018
787,866
1,181,617
14,846
769,265
654,598
57,466
17,877,387
39,502,426
963,577
122,043,421
18,758,186
3
7,852,494
19,982,691
406,550
73,576,662
8,218,151
80,585
11,090,426
21,226,567
578,670
49,631,746
11,429,552
83,055
11,204,934
21,410,624
581,005
49,757,665
11,525,169
Subtotal ....................................
45,047,650
3,668,678
3,427,212
199,202,463
110,036,551
94,037,545
94,562,450
Sanitation and Waste Removal
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
33,469
1,117,336
1,797,476
29,262
1,367,533
831,250
2,039
84,368
120,671
1,783
87,530
58,708
1,905
78,815
112,729
1,666
81,769
54,844
9,981
3,783,722
8,449,281
305,303
26,837,577
3,257,159
7
1,935,236
4,735,129
153,166
16,888,684
1,581,133
13,525
1,968,656
3,905,966
155,241
10,094,399
1,765,022
13,912
1,981,649
3,926,808
155,580
10,110,239
1,774,672
Subtotal ....................................
5,176,326
355,099
331,727
42,643,022
25,293,354
17,902,810
17,962,860
Telecommunications
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
64,849
3,579,895
5,274,999
59,652
4,687,346
2,724,734
5,117
311,005
425,661
4,637
373,919
260,838
4,780
290,535
397,645
4,332
349,308
243,670
21,032
12,308,820
25,792,488
544,081
79,412,836
9,652,087
14
6,509,796
14,993,199
280,645
50,846,902
4,891,989
28,014
6,188,114
11,369,355
269,865
29,072,061
5,058,656
28,769
6,229,906
11,430,805
270,559
29,126,648
5,090,561
Subtotal ....................................
16,391,476
1,381,178
1,290,271
127,731,345
77,522,545
51,986,066
52,177,248
Temporary Help Services
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
16,876
9,875,319
13,317,760
285,783
20,047,132
10,232,846
1,220
230,862
325,305
3,117
276,225
198,451
1,139
215,667
303,894
2,912
258,044
185,389
4,988
51,592,972
112,624,291
4,508,995
713,170,489
61,162,815
4
28,479,694
69,170,634
2,418,741
471,523,566
32,737,109
6,794
24,123,896
44,817,963
2,119,144
243,679,259
29,468,836
6,990
24,236,673
44,970,108
2,122,393
243,907,428
29,585,532
Subtotal ....................................
53,775,715
1,035,180
967,046
943,064,551
604,329,748
344,215,893
344,829,125
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
705,899
39,276,702
37,285,875
586,991
39,677,412
17,327,009
65,875
4,098,420
3,738,797
46,755
3,803,184
2,706,608
61,539
3,828,669
3,492,716
43,678
3,552,865
2,528,464
204,688
55,353,625
69,982,708
3,804,184
299,605,425
34,566,152
41
22,046,506
32,796,689
1,787,980
175,255,496
15,385,219
281,825
37,644,631
41,288,487
2,079,579
128,697,989
21,184,295
290,083
38,105,890
41,725,758
2,086,415
129,162,606
21,391,375
Subtotal ....................................
134,859,888
14,459,640
13,507,932
463,516,783
247,271,929
231,176,806
232,762,128
56,132
26,352,196
48,962,091
408,852
157,131,720
17
13,657,174
27,538,893
201,198
98,366,742
72,227
13,467,276
22,453,183
214,514
59,853,362
73,959
13,550,526
22,564,626
215,247
59,970,488
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Transportation
Utilities
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
I
148,444
7,146,656
9,587,651
62,534
10,044,588
Jkt 262001
I
PO 00000
12,671
575,888
712,199
6,067
839,241
Frm 00244
I
11,837
537,984
665,323
5,668
784,004
Fmt 4701
I
Sfmt 4702
I
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
I
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70941
TABLE VIII.C.28—TOTAL COSTS OF PROPOSED STANDARD BY INDUSTRY CATEGORY AND REGION—Continued
[2023]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
One-time
Annual
0%
Cost savings
2%
Western ...........................................
4,579,887
434,070
Subtotal ....................................
31,569,760
2,580,136
0%
2%
405,500
16,308,986
7,985,486
8,824,896
8,878,506
2,410,316
249,219,978
147,749,511
104,885,457
105,253,352
Warehousing
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
23,861
5,061,913
7,009,792
61,662
6,441,787
4,325,559
3,648
533,106
674,099
8,558
661,753
500,559
3,407
498,018
629,731
7,994
618,198
467,613
8,026
15,543,866
29,673,913
251,578
81,655,479
11,931,088
1
8,175,173
17,101,945
110,383
52,136,892
5,614,252
10,776
7,928,195
13,340,358
148,218
30,228,941
6,799,447
11,060
7,987,661
13,422,450
148,950
30,304,551
6,850,443
Subtotal ....................................
22,924,573
2,381,722
2,224,961
139,063,951
83,138,646
58,455,935
58,725,115
Non-Core
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
5,182,429
391,224,691
667,495,610
9,892,196
450,564,899
371,580,343
456,951
38,434,798
60,452,354
891,014
48,351,398
38,699,763
426,875
35,905,088
56,473,487
832,369
45,168,995
36,152,613
1,764,690
868,489,307
2,079,644,665
54,062,267
3,787,838,223
906,764,875
644
403,322,044
1,107,489,644
24,745,067
2,278,523,483
401,438,741
2,327,985
508,133,212
1,044,949,817
30,395,521
1,559,206,369
546,354,145
2,388,511
512,718,138
1,052,751,986
30,511,129
1,564,503,073
550,717,629
Subtotal ....................................
1,895,940,169
187,286,279
174,959,427
7,698,564,027
4,215,519,623
3,691,367,049
3,713,590,466
Total
Alaskan ............................................
Central .............................................
Eastern ............................................
Pacific ..............................................
Southern ..........................................
Western ...........................................
10,459,352
781,525,250
1,178,819,653
17,291,605
905,182,777
647,433,093
858,832
67,561,332
98,930,485
1,442,349
80,937,580
63,782,331
802,306
63,114,565
92,419,056
1,347,416
75,610,412
59,584,291
3,093,451
1,853,564,488
3,799,935,917
103,809,082
9,992,060,191
1,649,953,684
1,069
912,457,660
2,079,382,329
49,156,476
6,199,237,788
765,300,091
4,224,201
1,026,015,486
1,848,328,601
56,526,001
3,891,434,439
955,775,136
4,346,103
1,035,137,646
1,862,076,179
56,727,623
3,902,010,703
963,363,384
Total ..................................
3,540,711,730
313,512,910
292,878,045
17,402,416,812
10,005,535,413
7,782,303,863
7,823,661,638
Source: OSHA estimate.
a The total costs with cost savings accounts for the potential labor productivity loss avoided by having more efficient and effective rest breaks required by the proposed standard than are currently taken.
TABLE VIII.C.29—TOTAL COSTS OF THE PROPOSED STANDARD BY PROVISION
[2023$]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
Provision
One-time
Annual
0%
Rule Familiarization .........................
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
Plan ..............................................
Identifying Heat Hazards .................
Requirements at or above the Initial
Heat Trigger .................................
Requirements at or above the High
Heat Trigger .................................
Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning ...................
Training ...........................................
Total .........................................
Costs savings
2%
0%
2%
$153,433,817
$0
$0
$0
$0
$15,343,382
$17,081,254
996,730,462
71,768,226
0
313,512,910
0
292,878,045
173,783,056
367,833,244
0
0
273,456,102
406,361,358
284,745,597
408,428,047
563,572,187
0
0
1,530,484,155
87,542,404
1,499,298,970
1,505,682,286
4,451,329
0
0
14,222,455,144
9,917,993,009
4,304,907,268
4,304,957,686
276,228,782
1,474,526,928
0
0
0
0
626,032,515
481,828,698
0
0
653,655,393
629,281,391
656,784,106
645,982,661
3,540,711,730
313,512,910
292,878,045
17,402,416,812
10,005,535,413
7,782,303,863
7,823,661,638
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA estimate.
a The total costs with cost savings accounts for the potential labor productivity loss avoided by having more effective rest breaks required by the proposed standard
than are currently taken.
VI. Sensitivity Analysis
In this section, OSHA presents the
results of five sensitivity analyses where
isolated changes were made to the
parameter (cost model inputs)
assumptions that were used to estimate
the total costs of the proposed standard.
The methodology and calculations
underlying the estimates of the costs are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
generally linear and additive in nature.
Thus, the sensitivity of the results and
conclusions of this analysis will
generally be proportional to isolated
variations of a particular input
parameter. For example, if the estimated
time that an employee spends in annual
training was doubled, the corresponding
labor costs would double as well.
PO 00000
Frm 00245
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
OSHA evaluated a series of five such
changes in cost input parameters to
illustrate how these adjustments would
impact the estimated total costs of the
proposed standard. The requirements of
the proposed standard work collectively
to produce the benefit of avoided HRIs
and heat-related fatalities. The agency is
unable to directly attribute avoided
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70942
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
HRIs and heat-related fatalities to any
specific provision so is unable to
analyze the impact that these isolated
changes to parameters might have on
benefits.
In the first of five sensitivity tests,
OSHA decreased the estimated
percentage of buildings with adequate
cooling, which is an input into
calculating the number of indoor inscope firms and establishments. For this
analysis, OSHA reduced the number of
buildings that are cooled under an
assumption that all employees work in
areas that are adequately cooled only if
at least 70 percent of their floorspace
cooled (versus the assumption that this
condition is met when at least 50
percent of the floorspace is cooled).
OSHA used 60 percent of the percentage
of buildings with 51 to 99 percent of
floorspace cooled according to CBECS
data for 2018 plus the percentage of
buildings with 100 percent of floorspace
cooled to estimate the percentage of
establishments that are adequately
cooled under this sensitivity analysis.
For example, if the percentage of
buildings with 51 to 99 percent of
floorspace cooled is 25 percent and the
percentage of buildings with 100
percent of floorspace cooled is 50
percent, the estimate used in the
primary cost analysis is 75 percent of
buildings where all employees work in
spaces that are adequately cooled, while
the sensitivity analysis assumes that the
percentage is 65 percent. Table
VIII.C.30. shows that the estimated costs
of compliance would increase costs by
$585 million annually, or by about 7.5
percent.
In the second sensitivity test, OSHA
decreased the estimated noncompliance rates (i.e., assumed higher
baseline compliance) for rest breaks at
both heat triggers by half. OSHA
included this sensitivity test due to
uncertainty surrounding the
assumptions regarding the current
provision of rest breaks by employers
for non-heat related reasons (e.g., union
contracts, existing State laws) that may
result in an underestimate of baseline
compliance. As a result of this
adjustment, estimated annualized total
costs decreased by nearly $2.1 billion
annually, or approximately 27.0 percent
(see table VIII.C.30.).
In the third sensitivity test, OSHA
assumed that all employers without an
existing HIIPP will opt to use the OSHA
provided template to develop their
HIIPP, rather than a portion of
establishments opting to write a HIIPP
from scratch. Table VIII.C.30. shows that
this assumption would lower the
estimate annualized costs by $7.8
million, or about 0.1 percent.
For the fourth sensitivity analysis,
OSHA increased the estimated travel
time to rest breaks by one minute for
employees working indoors and two
minutes for employees working
outdoors, thus increasing travel time to
3 minutes for indoor employees and 6
minutes for outdoor employees. As
shown in table VIII.C.30., the increase in
travel time to rest breaks would increase
estimated annualized costs by
approximately $1.4 billion, or by about
18.1 percent.
The final sensitivity test looks at the
percent of productivity recovered as a
result of rest breaks. OSHA has
incorporated the potential cost
reduction from decreased worker
pacing—offsetting about 70 percent of
the labor cost of rest breaks.80 However,
this analysis rests on specific
assumptions and is dependent on the
extent of the available literature, in
which heat and productivity were
assessed in different settings with
different break policies, but break
policies did not vary within the same
setting. An alternative calculation,
provided in appendix A, suggests that
this offset may be even greater—up to
100 percent of the time spent for rest
breaks being recovered through
improved labor productivity.81
Assuming that scheduled rest breaks
offset pacing 100 percent for workers
above the high heat trigger, the cost of
this proposed standard would decrease
by about $2.5 billion making the total
costs around $7.8¥$2.5 = $5.3 billion.
OSHA welcomes input from the
public regarding all aspects of this
sensitivity analysis, including any data
or information regarding the accuracy of
the preliminary estimates of compliance
costs and benefits and how the
estimates of costs may be affected by
varying assumptions and
methodological approaches.
TABLE VIII.C.30—RESULTS FROM SENSITIVITY ANALYSES OF ISOLATED CHANGES TO COST MODEL PARAMETERS
OSHA’s primary
estimate
Sensitivity test
assumption
Using CBECS data, considered all
buildings with at least 51 percent
of floorspace cooled as adequately cooled.
As detailed in table VIII.C.3. Rest
Break Non-Compliance Rates by
State and Territory.
Using CBECS data, considered
buildings with 70 percent of
floorspace cooled as adequately
cooled.
Reduce the rates in table VIII.C.3.
Rest Break Non-Compliance
Rates by State and Territory by
50 percent (i.e., assume higher
baseline compliance).
100% of all employers ....................
Impact variable
Percentage of buildings cooled by
industry.
Rest break non-compliance rates ...
Percentage of establishments without existing HIIPP that will use
OSHA template.
Travel time to/from rest break area
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Recovered break time through improved productivity.
90 percent of all employers with
more than 10 employees, all employers with 10 or less employees.
2 minutes for indoor and 4 minutes
for outdoor.
∼70% of break time offset by increased productivity.
3 minutes for indoor and 6 minutes
for outdoor.
100% of break time offset by increased productivity.
Impact to
annualized
costs
Percentage
impact to
costs
Adjusted
annualized
costs
$585,344,087
7.48
$8,409,005,725
¥2,113,058,097
¥27.01
5,710,603,541
¥7,832,568
¥0.10
7,815,829,070
1,418,460,548
18.13
9,242,122,186
2,500,000,000
....................
5,300,000,000
Source: OSHA estimate.
80 See Section VIII.C.VI., Sensitivity Analysis for
a discussion of potential underestimation of levels
of current compliance with the rest break
requirements of the proposed standard and the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
impacts alternative noncompliance rates might have
on the estimated costs of the proposed standard.
81 As described in the discussion of additional
unquantified potential benefits, a reduction of
PO 00000
Frm 00246
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
pacing from increased rest breaks could potentially
increase production and revenue.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
D. Economic Feasibility
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Introduction
As explained in Section II., Pertinent
Legal Authority, to demonstrate that a
standard is economically feasible,
‘‘OSHA must construct a reasonable
estimate of compliance costs and
demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that
these costs will not threaten the
existence or competitive structure of an
industry, even if it does portend disaster
for some marginal firms.’’ Lead I, 647
F.2d at 1272. OSHA standards therefore
satisfy the economic feasibility criterion
so long as they do not cause massive
economic dislocations within a
particular industry or imperil the very
existence of the industry. Lead II, 939
F.2d at 980; see also Asbestos I, 499
F.2d. at 478.
In this feasibility analysis, when
OSHA speaks of the costs of complying
with the proposed standard as a percent
of revenues, it is referring to the costs
of complying with 29 CFR 1910.148 for
the subset of those establishments that
will incur obligations under the
proposed standard, as opposed to the
costs as a percent of all establishments
in an industry, whether they are directly
affected or not. This avoids
underestimating the average perestablishment cost used in the
feasibility analysis, even while it may
overstate the impact on the industry as
a whole. Based on the analysis below,
OSHA preliminarily concludes that the
proposed standard is economically
feasible.
II. OSHA’s Screening Test for Economic
Feasibility
To determine whether a standard is
economically feasible, OSHA typically
begins by using a screening test to
determine whether the costs of the
standard are beneath the threshold level
at which the economic viability of an
affected industry might be threatened.
The screening test is a revenue test.
While there is no firm rule on which to
base the threshold, OSHA generally
considers a standard to be economically
feasible for an affected industry when
the annualized costs of compliance are
less than one percent of annual
revenues for the average establishment
in an industry that incurs an obligation.
The one-percent revenue threshold is
intentionally set at a low level so that
OSHA can confidently assert that the
standard is economically feasible for
industries that are below the threshold
(i.e., industries for which the costs of
compliance are less than one percent of
annual revenues). To put the one
percent threshold into perspective,
across the wide swath of affected
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
industries, prices (and therefore
revenues), particularly in the recent
past, are generally observed to change
by considerably more than one percent
per year.82 83
Another and less reliable screening
test that OSHA traditionally used to
consider whether a standard is
economically feasible for an affected
industry is whether the costs of
compliance are less than ten percent of
annual profits for the average
establishment (see, e.g., OSHA’s
economic analysis of its 2016
Occupational Exposure to Respirable
Crystalline Silica (Silica) rulemaking, 81
FR 16286, 16533 (Mar. 25, 2016);
upheld in N. Am.’s Bldg. Trades Unions
v. OSHA, 878 F.3d 271, 300 (D.C. Cir.,
2017)). The ten-percent profit test was
intended to be at a sufficiently low level
to allow OSHA to identify industries
that might require further examination.
Specifically, the profit screening was
primarily used to alert OSHA to
potential impacts on industries where
demand does not allow for ready
absorption of new costs (e.g., industries
with foreign competition where the
American firms would incur costs that
their foreign competitors would not
because they are not subject to OSHA
requirements). In addition, setting the
threshold for the profit test low
provided an additional basis for
concluding that the standard would be
economically feasible for industries
below that threshold, without further
evaluation. OSHA notes that this profit
screen relied on accounting profit
(revenues minus explicit costs) versus
the superior profit measurement of
economic profit (revenues minus
explicit costs minus implicit costs).
For this proposed standard, OSHA
has discontinued the use of its profit
screening test for the following reasons.
First, OSHA has been virtually alone
among Federal agencies in consistently
using a profitability test (comparing
costs to profits) as part of its regulatory
impact analyses. The agency could find
no evidence that other Federal
regulatory agencies are being asked to
examine feasibility based on profits.
OSHA infers that the silence on the use
of the profitability test among all other
Federal regulatory bodies implies that
the revenue test is sufficient. Even
OSHA’s sister agency, the Mine Safety
and Health Administration (MSHA),
does not rely on a profitability test
despite very similar statutory language
82 For data on Consumer Price Index (CPI)
changes over time, see BLS’s CPI website at https://
www.bls.gov/cpi/.
83 For data on Producer Price Index (PPI) changes
over time, see BLS’s PPI website at https://
www.bls.gov/ppi/.
PO 00000
Frm 00247
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70943
that also requires an economic
feasibility determination for its
regulations.84
Secondly, eliminating the profit test
avoids OSHA’s reliance on published
IRS corporate net income data that lack
transparency, comprehensive coverage
within industries, and statistical
reliability for industries where sample
sizes may be statistically inadequate.
Furthermore, because firms typically
have an incentive to minimize their tax
burden, it is reasonable to expect that
some of the reported accounting data
may have been strategically adjusted to
reduce reported profits and their
associated tax implications. Business
profits are much more likely to reflect
such strategic accounting than business
revenues. It is therefore unsurprising
that OSHA is the lone outlier by
including profit screens in its economic
analysis. As the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) noted in its
economic impact analysis supporting
the National Air Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Halogenated
Solvent Cleaning (72 FR 25138 (May 3,
2007)) 85, when explaining its reliance
on a ‘‘sales test’’ (revenue) and rejecting
the use of industry profits as part of its
determination of the impact of its
regulation on small businesses,
‘‘revenues or sales data is commonly
available data for entities normally
impacted by EPA regulations and profits
data normally made available is often
not the true profits earned by firms due
to accounting and tax considerations.’’
EPA also noted that ‘‘firms and entities
often have ways available in the tax
code to reduce their reported profits;
thus, using reported profits may lead to
an overestimate of the economic impact
of a regulation to an affected firm or
entity and their consumers.’’ OSHA is
aware of no other publicly available
source of business income data.
Even to the extent that firms are not
manipulating profit data for tax
purposes, profit data are often not
accurately aligned with a firm’s
financial status for purposes of
evaluating the economic impact of an
OSHA standard. For example, a firm
that had already invested a significant
amount of capital to voluntarily adopt
all of the controls proposed by OSHA’s
84 The Mine Act instructs the Secretary to ‘‘set
standards which most adequately assure on the
basis of the best available evidence that no miner
will suffer material impairment of health or
functional capacity.’’ 30 U.S.C. 811(a)(6)(A). It goes
on to say that ‘‘[i]n addition to the attainment of the
highest degree of health and safety protection for
the miner, other considerations shall be . . . the
feasibility of the standards.’’
85 Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/
files/2020-07/documents/halogenated-solvent_eia_
neshap_final_05-2007.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70944
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
standard could show only marginal
profit after accounting for those
expenses, suggesting that it would be
economically infeasible for that firm to
comply with OSHA’s standard. Yet, in
reality, its ability to comply with
OSHA’s standard could not be
questioned because compliance had
already been accomplished.
OSHA is required to make its
determinations on the best available
evidence, and OSHA’s experience has
been that the profit screen has
amounted to little more than a
distraction that unhelpfully flags
industries for time-consuming analyses,
while not actually aiding the agency in
identifying industries for which
standards would be economically
infeasible. For example, the profit
screen can produce the unhelpful result
of flagging industries with significant
numbers of nonprofit or not-for-profit
organizations, as well as failing (at least
for tax purposes) enterprises reporting
negative profits. The revenue screen is
obviously more useful for evaluating the
economic impact of the standard on
such entities.
Another example of the inefficiency
of the profit screen is that it often
requires OSHA to manipulate data to
adjust for the underlying limitations of
the profit data sources to perform the
screening analysis at all. If significant
adjustments are necessary, the result
becomes less meaningful. As a case in
point, this proposed standard would
affect nineteen 4-digit NAICS industries
in the Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting sector (NAICS 11). No profit
data are available at the 4-digit level for
any of the 19 industries, and, since
2013, about half of the profit data at the
3-digit level are missing. OSHA’s
traditional process for adjusting data to
perform the profit screen is to substitute
data from the next highest level of
NAICS codes (focusing on a broader
swath of industries). In order for OSHA
to include these industries in a profit
screen for this rulemaking, OSHA
would have had to apply the 2-digit
profit rate to all 19 industries, which are
as different as logging and aquaculture
with the result potentially flagging
economic distress for one industry that
is actually the result of more drastic
economic problems in an entirely
different industry (e.g., flagging impacts
on aquaculture that would actually
result from a decrease in logging
profits).
OSHA also notes that it gathers
additional information about potential
economic impacts directly from small
not-for-profit entities and small
businesses as part of its compliance
with the Small Business Regulatory
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA),
discussed in more detail later in this
analysis. OSHA is one of only a handful
of agencies required to engage in this
process, which along with the
opportunity for public comment on
proposed standards and the
accompanying economic analysis,
provides an additional avenue for the
agency to identify potential significant
economic impact not flagged via the
revenue screen. Avoiding the red
herrings produced by the profit screen
allows the agency to focus its resources
on areas where the best evidence
indicates that a standard may truly pose
economic feasibility issues for an
industry.
Third, compounding underlying
issues with profit reporting is the reality
that current IRS data are measurably
different and inferior to pre-2013 IRS
profit data because the more recent data
are presented at a more aggregated level
(e.g., at the 2-digit rather than 6-digit
NAICS level). These changes to the IRS
data make them incompatible with
performing this type of screening
analysis. Up to this point, where OSHA
presented a profit screening analysis,
the agency was relying on data from
2003 through 2013. At this point, it is
difficult to assume that profit data from
those years are meaningfully
representative of current industry
activity. Accordingly, revenues are a
more accurate measure than profits for
evaluating economic feasibility and
those data are regularly collected and
reported by agencies such as the Census
Bureau. Therefore, the appropriate
economic feasibility test will be the
revenue test for most or all covered
industries.
OSHA judges that the revenue test can
stand alone in playing the signaling role
that it has long served in tandem with
the profit screen, given the latter’s
increasing unreliability. That is, a
standard is not necessarily judged
economically infeasible for the
industries that do not pass the initial
revenue screening test (i.e., those for
which the costs of compliance with the
standard are one percent or more of
annual revenues) nor did previous
OSHA analyses declare a standard
infeasible based on one or more
industries failing the profit screening
test. Instead, OSHA normally views
industries failing one or both tests as
requiring additional examination as to
whether the standard would be
economically feasible (see N. Am.’s
Bldg. Trades Unions v. OSHA, 878 F.3d
at 297). OSHA therefore conducts
further analysis of the industries that
‘‘fail’’ the screening tests to evaluate
whether the standard would threaten
PO 00000
Frm 00248
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the existence or competitive structure of
those industries (see United
Steelworkers of Am., AFL–CIO–CLC v.
Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189, 1272 (D.C. Cir.
1980)) and the agency will continue to
do so for industries that fail the revenue
screening test. There are fluctuations of
prices over time with a general
inflationary long-term trend upward,
and they include effects such as the
pass-through of costs and modifications
in tax accounting procedures. Using the
cost-to-profit test has never led to the
conclusion that a standard will
eliminate an industry or significantly
alter its competitive structure, and as
described above, that test is increasingly
limited given the lack of data available.
Instead, the revenue test is sufficient to
signal to OSHA where it should look
more carefully at one or more industries
to assess feasibility.
III. Time Parameters for Analysis
OSHA’s economic analyses almost
always measure the costs of a standard
on an annual basis, conducting the
screening tests by measuring the cost of
the standard against the annual
revenues for a given industry. One year
is typically the minimum period for
evaluating the status of a business; for
example, most business filings for tax or
financial purposes are annual in nature.
Some compliance costs are up-front
costs and others are spread over the
duration of compliance with the
standard; regardless, the costs of the
standard overall will not typically be
incurred or absorbed by businesses all at
once. For example, the initial capital
costs for equipment that will be used
over many years are typically addressed
through installments over a year or more
to leverage loans or payment options to
allow more time to marshal revenue and
minimize impacts on reserves.
This proposed standard would
include permanent requirements to
protect employees from hazards of heat
stress in the workplace. Thus, for this
proposed standard, OSHA has based its
analysis of economic feasibility on
annual costs and revenues. As noted
earlier in this feasibility analysis, this is
consistent with OSHA’s typical
methodology for analyzing economic
feasibility (e.g., OSHA’s final Silica rule,
81 FR 16533).
IV. Data Used for the Feasibility
Screening Test
OSHA presents the estimated costs of
complying with this proposed standard
in Costs of Compliance (Section VIII.C.,
Costs of Compliance) and table VIII.D.1.
in this section presents a summary of
those costs, including average cost per
establishment and total annual costs, by
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
4-digit NAICS code. OSHA relies on
these estimated costs in its examination
of feasibility, using the test described
above.
Most revenue numbers used to
determine cost-to-revenue ratios were
obtained from the 2017 SUSB (Census
Bureau, 2021a). This is the most current
information available from this source,
which OSHA considers to be the best
available source of revenue data for U.S.
businesses. OSHA adjusted these figures
to 2023 dollars using the Bureau of
Economic Analysis’s GDP deflator (BEA,
n.d.), which is OSHA’s standard source
for inflation and deflation analysis (See
Section VIII.C., Costs of Compliance for
a full discussion of data sources and
methodology). For industries that are
unavailable in the SUSB dataset, OSHA
sourced revenue data from a variety of
other sources. These industries are
listed below, along with the alternative
sources and methods for estimating
annual revenues.
Agriculture: As most agricultural
industries are not included in the SUSB
dataset,86 OSHA used the Department of
Agriculture’s 2017 Census of
Agriculture (USDA, 2017) to derive
estimates of annual revenues.
Specifically, OSHA used industry-level
estimates of ‘‘total sales’’ from chapter 1,
table 75 ‘‘Summary by North American
Industry Classification System’’ to
represent annual revenues. Since these
‘‘total sales’’ data are combined for
Aquaculture (NAICS 1125) and Other
Animal Production (NAICS 1129),
OSHA based NAICS 1125 revenues on
NOAA Fisheries’ Aquaculture website,
which estimated U.S. aquaculture
production at $1.5 billion (NOAA,
2023a). For NAICS 1129, OSHA
subtracted this $1.5 billion from the
Agriculture Census ‘‘total sales’’
estimate for NAICS 1125 and 1129.
OSHA adjusted these figures to 2023
dollars using the BEA’s GDP deflator.
Local Government: OSHA relied on
data from three alternative sources for
local government estimates. To estimate
total receipts for local government
entities, OSHA first estimated the
average annual receipts per resident by
State. The estimate was equal to the
ratio of total local government receipts
in the datasets found in the Census
Bureau’s 2021 Annual Survey of State
and Local Government Finances
86 The NAICS industries that were estimated
using this method are Oilseed and Grain Farming
(111100), Vegetable and Melon Farming (111200),
Fruit and Nut Tree Farming (111300), Greenhouse,
Nursery, and Floriculture (111400), Other Crop
Farming (111900), Cattle Ranch and Farming
(112100), Hog and Pig Farming (112200), Poultry
and Egg Production (112300), Sheep and Goat
Farming (112400), Aquaculture (112500), and Other
Animal Production (112900).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(Census Bureau, 2023a) to the total
population served in the GUS dataset.
OSHA then multiplied the population
associated with each government entity
captured in the GUS with the ratio from
step one to arrive at an estimate of total
annual receipts per government entity.
State Government: OSHA used the
State government revenues estimated in
the Census Bureau’s 2021 Annual
Survey of State and Local Government
Finances (Census Bureau, 2023a) to
estimate annual receipts for State
governments. For U.S. territories, OSHA
used point estimates from other sources
(American Samoa Department of
Commerce, 2021; Guam Governor’s
Office, 2024; CNMI Department of
Commerce, 2017; Financial Oversight
and Management Board for Puerto Rico,
2023; USVI’s Governor’s Office, 2024).
OSHA adjusted these figures to 2023
dollars using the BEA’s GDP deflator.
Rail Transportation,87 Postal Service,
and Insurance and Employee Benefit
Funds: A small subset of nonagricultural industries are also
unavailable in the SUSB dataset. These
industries are Rail Transportation
(NAICS 4821), Postal and Delivery
Services (NAICS 4911), and Insurance
and Employment Benefit Funds (NAICS
5251). The economic data estimates for
these three industries were derived from
the Quarterly Census of Employment
and Wages (QCEW) collected by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). While
the QCEW does not present revenue
data, it does include total annual wages
by industry and State. OSHA used the
ratio of receipts to wages from the SUSB
dataset for corresponding sector-level
data (e.g., the ratio applied to wage data
for NAICS 5251 is based on receipts and
wage data for sector 52 in the SUSB
dataset) to convert the 2022 QCEW wage
data (BLS, 2023f) into annual receipts
by industry and State.
A large percentage of the costs of this
proposed standard are variable costs
because they depend primarily on the
number and types of employees at an
establishment. While fixed cost can be
more limiting in terms of options for
businesses, most of the costs of this
standard are not fixed. Instead, most of
the compliance costs vary with the level
87 The FRA has promulgated regulations requiring
the use of environmental controls to address heat
hazards in three specific, limited contexts: nonsteam-powered locomotives purchased or
remanufactured after June 8, 2012 (49 CFR
229.119(g)), camp cars (49 CFR 228.313(c)), and
certain on-track roadway maintenance machines (49
CFR 214.505(a)). OSHA’s standard would apply to
the working conditions of railroad employees in all
other contexts, including within trains and
machinery not covered by these regulations and
during all outdoor work.
PO 00000
Frm 00249
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70945
and type of output and employment at
an establishment.
In general, ‘‘[w]hen an industry is
subjected to a higher cost, it does not
simply swallow it; it raises its price and
reduces its output, and in this way
shifts a part of the cost to its consumers
and a part to its suppliers.’’ Am. Dental
Ass’n v. Sec’y of Labor, 984 F.2d 823,
829 (7th Cir., 1993). Increases in prices
in industries with elastic demand
typically result in reduced quantity
demanded, but rarely eliminate all
demand for the product. Increases in
costs can also be passed along, but with
a likely reduction in output.
A reduction in output could happen
in a variety of ways: individual
establishments could reduce their level
of service or production, both of which
take the form of a reduction of employee
hours; some marginal establishments
could close; or in the case of an industry
with high turnover of establishments,
new entry could be delayed until
demand equals supply. In many cases,
a decrease in overall output for an
industry will be a combination of all
three kinds of reductions. The primary
means of achieving the reduction in
output most likely depends on the rate
of turnover of establishments in the
industry and on the form that the costs
of the regulation take.
There are two situations typically
mentioned when an industry subject to
regulatory costs might be unable to pass
those costs on: (1) foreign competition
not subject to the regulation; or (2)
domestic competition from other firms
or other industries, not subject to the
regulation, that produce goods or
services that are close substitutes.
Otherwise, when all affected domestic
industries are covered by a standard and
foreign businesses must also comply
with the standard or are unable to
compete effectively, the ability of a
competing industry to offer a substitute
product at a lower price is greatly
diminished.
V. Factors That Indicate the Ability To
Absorb or Pass on the Costs of the
Proposed Standard
As discussed above, when all
establishments in an affected industry
are covered by and required to comply
with a standard, none of the competitors
gain any economic advantage from the
standard and the ability of a competitor
to offer a substitute product or service
at a lower price is greatly diminished.
OSHA believes this is the case for the
industries covered by the proposed
standard. The scope of proposed 29 CFR
1910.148 is broad. The proposed
standard applies, with certain
exceptions, to each setting where any
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70946
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
employee is exposed to heat above a
specified threshold, with the result that
if an employer enters such a setting, it
must comply with the standard. Hence,
given the proposed standard’s broad
applicability, any employer in a
particular industry, including domestic
competitors providing similar services
or goods, would equally be subject to
the proposed standard. This negates the
potential for substitution by an industry
not subject to the standard.
In addition, and as discussed below,
OSHA has concluded that many
employers that provide services affected
by the proposed standard are generally
not subject to international competition
(e.g., personal services, such as child
care, healthcare services and healthcare
support services, and building support
services like landscaping and
maintenance) because they must be
performed domestically. Thus, for those
industries, competition from foreign
entities that would not also be subject
to this proposed standard and its related
costs is not a factor.
Finally, while OSHA has attempted to
quantify the more obvious cost savings
associated with compliance with the
proposed standard, in terms of a wage
cost offset from increased labor
productivity, there are more subtle
benefits to reducing heat stress, which
suggests that the actual net costs of the
proposed standard will be lower than
the cost estimates in Section VIII.C.,
Costs of Compliance used to
demonstrate economic feasibility. These
cost savings are difficult to quantify and
include increased labor supply and
decreased disutility to employees. For
additional discussion of this issue, see
Section VIII.D., Benefits. The economic
advantages of increasing the retention of
employees by reducing peak heat
stressors has been noted in numerous
articles, and while difficult to quantify,
would tend to counteract the relatively
more obvious costs of intervention (e.g.,
Glaser et al., 2022).
VI. Economic Feasibility Screening
Analysis
This section summarizes OSHA’s
economic feasibility findings for
specific industries covered by the
proposed standard. As stated
previously, the agency has historically
used the two screening tests (costs less
than one percent of revenue and costs
less than ten percent of profit) as an
initial indicator of economic feasibility;
however, as discussed earlier, OSHA
has discontinued use of the profit
screening test because of its serious
flaws. In this section, OSHA identifies
and discusses the industries that fall
above the threshold level for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
revenue screening test. OSHA also
identifies and discusses industries
where small and very small industries
fall above the threshold.
A. Economic Feasibility Screening
Analysis: All Establishments
Table VIII.D.1. shows that for the
majority of industries, as defined by
covered NAICS codes, the cost-torevenue ratios are below OSHA’s
screening threshold of one percent, with
an average cost for all 298 affected
industries of 0.04 percent of revenues.
This means that if the average firm
needed to absorb the costs of the
standard (rather than passing the costs
through to other parties), this would
amount to an additional four cent
burden on $100 of revenue and suggests
that compliance with this proposed
standard would be feasible for all of
these industries.
Five of the 298 industries are
estimated to have costs equal to or
greater than one percent of revenues.
They are all in either agriculture or inperson health care or social assistance
services. Two agricultural industries,
Sheep and Goat Farming (NAICS 1124)
and Other Animal Production (NAICS
1129) were found to have costs above
one percent of revenues among affected
establishments. Three health care and
social assistance industries, Individual
and Family Services (NAICS 6241),
Vocational Rehabilitation Services
(NAICS 6243), and Child Care Services
(NAICS 6244) were also found to have
costs above one percent of revenues.
Some industries, such as agriculture,
would be expected to have relatively
large impacts under the proposed
standard, due to the prevalence of
outdoor work. Nonetheless, the costs of
their compliance with the proposed
standard would not generally be
expected to exceed one percent of
revenues when all cost offsets (e.g.,
current practices to address heat
hazards, productivity gains outside of
rest breaks) are considered, based on
available empirical evidence. For
example, the Fair Food Program in
Florida (Rivero and Uzcategui, 2024),
which encompassed a number of labor
benefits (e.g., wage bonuses) in addition
to heat stress protection, resulted in
price increases of only one extra cent
per pound of tomatoes,88 for a total
88 This measure is an increase in price, not costs.
The pass through of costs could be less than 100
percent due to competition. However, since a
portion of the one-cent premium is used to pay a
worker bonus, one can infer that the increase in cost
of compliance is likely less than one-cent and that
pass-through of costs to firms is greater than 100
percent.
PO 00000
Frm 00250
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
average price of about $2 per pound,89
to cover the cost of the protections and
benefits to employees. This suggests that
the net cost of robust heat illness
protections may be less than 0.5 percent
of revenues in an industry and
geographic region that would be most
significantly affected by the proposed
standard. Sheep and Goat Farming
(NAICS 1124) and Other Animal
Production (NAICS 1129), which both
have costs greater than one percent of
revenues, are both heavily weighted to
very small family-owned farms (USDA,
2019). Due to a Congressional budget
rider, OSHA is not able to expend funds
on enforcement activities for small
farms. Only about 5 percent of sheep
and goat farms are something other than
family-owned farms (i.e., partnerships
or corporations). The data for other
animal production and aquaculture
farms are combined and reported as a
single industry. For those two industries
combined, 10 percent of farms are
something other than family-owned
farms. Given the economies of scale
necessary for aquaculture, it’s likely that
these account for more of the corporate
farms in the combined Other Animal
Production and Aquaculture data,
meaning more farms in NAICS 1129
may be family-owned farms than appear
to be in the combined data. Based on the
2017 Census of Agriculture (USDA,
2019), about 12,000 of about 93,000 total
sheep and goat farms have hired labor
and those have on average 2 hired
laborers. For other animal production
and aquaculture combined, about
41,000 farms out of about 222,000 total
farms report having hired labor and
have on average 3 hired laborers. Based
on the size and organization of these
farms, and because a longstanding
appropriations rider generally prevents
OSHA from enforcing its standards
against most small farm operations with
10 or fewer employees, it is unlikely
OSHA would enforce the proposed
standard in those industries.
Aside from the issues discussed
previously, the agency believes some of
these industries are unlikely to have as
large of a cost as a percentage of revenue
as presented, in part due to inflexibility
in the cost analysis regarding the
amount of time spent outside in heat in
a nondiscretionary manner. For
example, even if the assumption that
employees in healthcare or child care
services spend a large percentage of
their time outside is realistic under
normal circumstances, these employees
would likely limit their time outside in
high heat situations if only to protect
89 As of December 2023, https://
fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU0000712311).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
those in their care. This is also true in
livestock industries that have existing
recommendations for shade and shelter
for livestock under extreme heat
conditions.90 If the costs of complying
with this proposed standard were
onerous, limiting employee exposure to
the outdoors during times of extreme
heat would be a costless method to
comply with the standard and could
possibly result in these employers being
fully exempt from the standard (e.g., if
the employer limited employee’s
outdoor exposure to meet the exemption
for short duration employee exposure).
OSHA believes that these five industries
have estimated costs that exceed one
percent of revenue as a result of data
limitations, rather than a real finding of
infeasibility. Therefore, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that the
proposed rule is economically feasible.
70947
The agency welcomes public
comment on what the likely practical
effects of the proposed standard would
be in these various industries. To the
extent commenters believe the proposed
standard poses an issue of economic
feasibility, the agency welcomes
comment on how the proposed standard
should be modified to achieve greater
feasibility.
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
NAICS
Industry
1111
1112
1113
1114
...................
...................
...................
...................
1119
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1129
1131
1132
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
1133
1141
1142
1151
1152
1153
2111
2131
2211
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
2212
2213
2361
2362
2371
2372
2373
2379
2381
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
2382
2383
2389
3111
3112
3113
3114
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3121
3122
3131
3132
3133
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3141 ...................
3149 ...................
3151 ...................
Establishments
Oilseed and Grain Farming ..................................
Vegetable and Melon Farming .............................
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming ..................................
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production.
Other Crop Farming ..............................................
Cattle Ranching and Farming ...............................
Hog and Pig Farming ............................................
Poultry and Egg Production ..................................
Sheep and Goat Farming .....................................
Aquaculture ...........................................................
Other Animal Production .......................................
Timber Tract Operations .......................................
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products.
Logging .................................................................
Fishing ...................................................................
Hunting and Trapping ...........................................
Support Activities for Crop Production .................
Support Activities for Animal Production ..............
Support Activities for Forestry ..............................
Oil and Gas Extraction ..........................................
Support Activities for Mining .................................
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and
Distribution.
Natural Gas Distribution ........................................
Water, Sewage and Other Systems .....................
Residential Building Construction .........................
Nonresidential Building Construction ....................
Utility System Construction ...................................
Land Subdivision ...................................................
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction ...........
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors.
Building Equipment Contractors ...........................
Building Finishing Contractors ..............................
Other Specialty Trade Contractors .......................
Animal Food Manufacturing ..................................
Grain and Oilseed Milling .....................................
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty
Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing ................................
Animal Slaughtering and Processing ....................
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging ......
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing .....................
Other Food Manufacturing ....................................
Beverage Manufacturing .......................................
Tobacco Manufacturing ........................................
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills ...............................
Fabric Mills ............................................................
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating
Mills.
Textile Furnishings Mills .......................................
Other Textile Product Mills ...................................
Apparel Knitting Mills ............................................
90 USDA guidance for the livestock industry
identifies provision of shelter, increased shade, and
altering plans based on heat exposure (https://
www.climatehubs.usda.gov/approach/manage-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Total
annualized
costs
Frm 00251
Average
revenue per
establishment
Costs as %
of revenue
19,259
2,635
7,247
3,362
$22,566,188
13,812,142
20,428,950
17,437,825
$1,172
5,242
2,819
5,186
$1,039,788
1,435,990
887,377
922,741
0.11
0.37
0.32
0.56
12,848
24,349
1,491
2,904
1,995
208
6,404
498
168
22,027,652
41,972,826
3,582,128
6,619,341
3,420,215
895,579
11,346,005
726,511
179,247
1,714
1,724
2,402
2,279
1,714
4,301
1,772
1,459
1,067
334,120
884,209
3,692,579
3,595,687
109,499
1,415,210
143,632
2,701,023
1,164,036
0.51
0.19
0.07
0.06
1.57
0.30
1.23
0.05
0.09
8,084
2,473
351
5,049
4,765
1,788
6,382
13,313
11,101
7,860,331
1,185,393
374,292
7,698,282
3,734,295
1,775,204
23,921,221
79,841,646
80,690,106
972
479
1,066
1,525
784
993
3,748
5,997
7,269
1,692,869
1,188,497
799,221
3,457,291
724,524
1,311,774
43,886,186
7,972,536
45,828,657
0.06
0.04
0.13
0.04
0.11
0.08
0.01
0.08
0.02
2,497
4,879
173,182
43,061
19,159
4,943
9,752
4,324
93,258
12,578,004
11,985,242
124,444,236
97,309,378
112,079,119
3,549,637
43,581,038
11,738,493
168,622,817
5,037
2,456
719
2,260
5,850
718
4,469
2,715
1,808
40,786,387
3,542,449
2,401,784
13,006,470
9,895,873
2,247,710
15,724,180
6,787,322
2,354,331
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.02
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.08
184,768
116,519
69,751
895
369
941
916
342,792,872
136,463,298
97,414,741
2,550,666
2,281,901
3,360,910
6,966,483
1,855
1,171
1,397
2,850
6,192
3,574
7,605
2,724,810
1,425,684
2,689,361
35,255,690
106,536,918
17,901,036
43,442,236
0.07
0.08
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
801
1,742
270
5,847
1,887
4,528
69
136
386
402
5,315,596
28,278,302
1,229,069
16,243,920
9,779,813
9,124,037
773,005
2,067,055
2,777,269
1,843,098
6,640
16,233
4,561
2,778
5,183
2,015
11,285
15,199
7,204
4,591
76,548,651
72,789,500
29,356,549
6,816,984
33,613,908
14,142,707
262,563,987
31,396,792
18,720,390
10,606,110
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.04
818
2,022
89
3,870,400
3,442,371
523,876
4,734
1,702
5,920
9,794,328
2,702,841
6,382,954
0.05
0.06
0.09
livestock-cope-warmer-and-drier-conditions).
Similarly, South Dakota State University Extension
recommends provision of shade during the day,
minimization, or avoidance of unnecessary animal
PO 00000
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
work during hot time periods, and adequate
ventilation and air movement for indoor animal
housing (https://extension.sdstate.edu/heat-stresssmall-ruminants).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70948
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
3152 ...................
3159 ...................
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing ....................
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing.
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing .............
Footwear Manufacturing .......................................
Other Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing
Sawmills and Wood Preservation .........................
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product
Manufacturing.
Other Wood Product Manufacturing .....................
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills .......................
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing .............
Printing and Related Support Activities ................
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing .......
Basic Chemical Manufacturing .............................
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural
Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing .......
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing .......
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing.
Plastics Product Manufacturing ............................
Rubber Product Manufacturing .............................
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing ........
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing ..............
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing .....
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing ...........
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased
Steel.
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing.
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production
and Processing.
Foundries ..............................................................
Forging and Stamping ..........................................
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing ....................
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing.
Hardware Manufacturing .......................................
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing ..............
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw,
Nut, and Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities.
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing ...
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery
Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing ......................
Commercial and Service Industry Machinery
Manufacturing.
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing ...............
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing.
Communications Equipment Manufacturing .........
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing .........
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and
Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Manufacturing and Reproducing Magnetic and
Optical Media.
Electric Lighting Equipment Manufacturing ..........
Household Appliance Manufacturing ....................
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing .....................
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing.
3161
3162
3169
3211
3212
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3219
3221
3222
3231
3241
3251
3252
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3253 ...................
3254 ...................
3255 ...................
3256 ...................
3259 ...................
3261
3262
3271
3272
3273
3274
3279
3311
3312
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3313 ...................
3314 ...................
3315
3321
3322
3323
3324
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3325 ...................
3326 ...................
3327 ...................
3328 ...................
3329 ...................
3331 ...................
3332 ...................
3333 ...................
3334 ...................
3335 ...................
3336 ...................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
3339 ...................
3341 ...................
3342 ...................
3343 ...................
3344 ...................
3345 ...................
3346 ...................
3351
3352
3353
3359
...................
...................
...................
...................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Establishments
PO 00000
Frm 00252
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Average
revenue per
establishment
Costs as %
of revenue
2,480
286
4,006,111
574,129
1,616
2,011
2,064,640
2,548,686
0.08
0.08
78
112
364
1,634
670
101,034
773,050
444,901
7,765,268
5,091,443
1,304
6,902
1,222
4,752
7,605
7,624,471
8,295,065
2,105,457
12,001,150
19,759,596
0.02
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.04
4,904
173
1,787
12,693
1,022
1,144
681
16,287,680
6,568,365
12,244,762
14,738,174
8,724,306
11,393,676
8,148,929
3,321
37,967
6,854
1,161
8,541
9,964
11,966
5,998,996
235,901,294
34,990,870
3,996,639
267,378,536
108,368,479
91,947,879
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.01
440
1,670,914
3,798
28,466,636
0.01
1,166
873
1,102
12,270,203
4,187,636
5,589,291
10,528
4,800
5,072
109,652,940
29,510,337
37,391,152
0.01
0.02
0.01
1,093
4,806,806
4,398
23,897,452
0.02
5,149
880
550
815
4,404
118
1,585
268
318
35,819,947
6,058,076
2,002,058
4,007,533
13,765,912
725,364
4,779,209
5,962,845
3,034,850
6,957
6,888
3,640
4,917
3,126
6,173
3,016
22,291
9,559
22,658,441
21,611,316
8,078,807
15,793,703
7,785,632
26,805,595
8,864,633
201,642,290
38,589,534
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.02
210
2,605,926
12,409
61,726,946
0.02
389
3,035,679
7,804
61,261,580
0.01
796
1,141
558
6,472
740
5,296,856
4,199,802
1,274,207
23,411,603
4,557,414
6,654
3,682
2,286
3,618
6,163
20,840,709
14,958,369
9,193,550
8,360,234
24,162,652
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.03
304
555
11,346
1,285,814
1,725,936
16,998,778
4,230
3,110
1,498
16,750,859
9,533,258
3,557,493
0.03
0.03
0.04
2,761
7,251,052
2,626
5,616,834
0.05
3,063
1,422
12,570,102
10,297,500
4,104
7,242
12,315,179
32,127,400
0.03
0.02
1,534
939
4,564,312
3,136,561
2,976
3,340
12,175,393
15,121,049
0.02
0.02
842
7,964,382
9,459
29,965,620
0.03
3,159
441
5,185,713
3,614,996
1,642
8,197
6,125,519
51,409,099
0.03
0.02
2,903
449
13,233,407
841,625
4,559
1,877
19,613,189
19,085,845
0.02
0.01
614
227
1,900
2,801,459
293,740
8,118,846
4,563
1,294
4,273
31,095,928
6,807,492
27,994,372
0.01
0.02
0.02
2,520
10,704,689
4,248
31,086,340
0.01
204
198,879
977
4,335,534
0.02
501
125
995
977
1,444,609
1,066,209
5,832,098
4,726,132
2,886
8,530
5,861
4,840
13,083,478
45,138,353
21,618,940
22,536,250
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
Fmt 4701
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70949
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3369
3371
Industry
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
3372 ...................
3379
3391
3399
4231
...................
...................
...................
...................
4232 ...................
4233 ...................
4234 ...................
4235 ...................
4236 ...................
4237 ...................
4238 ...................
4239 ...................
4241 ...................
4242 ...................
4243 ...................
4244 ...................
4245 ...................
4246 ...................
4247 ...................
4248 ...................
4249 ...................
4251
4411
4412
4413
...................
...................
...................
...................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4441 ...................
4442 ...................
4451
4452
4453
4491
4492
4551
4552
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
4561
4571
4572
4581
4582
4583
4591
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
4592
4593
4594
4595
...................
...................
...................
...................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Establishments
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing ................................
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing ....
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing ......................
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing .......
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing ..................
Ship and Boat Building .........................................
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing ..
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen
Cabinet Manufacturing.
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing.
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing ..
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing .....................
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers.
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant
Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment
and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers.
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant
Wholesalers.
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers.
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers.
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers.
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant
Wholesalers.
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage
Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant
Wholesalers.
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers ..................
Automobile Dealers ...............................................
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers ................................
Automotive Parts, Accessories, and Tire Retailers.
Building Material and Supplies Dealers ................
Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Retailers.
Grocery and Convenience Retailers .....................
Specialty Food Retailers .......................................
Beer, Wine, and Liquor Retailers .........................
Furniture and Home Furnishings Retailers ...........
Electronics and Appliance Retailers .....................
Department Stores ................................................
Warehouse Clubs, Supercenters, and Other General Merchandise Retailers.
Health and Personal Care Retailers .....................
Gasoline Stations ..................................................
Fuel Dealers ..........................................................
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Retailers .......
Shoe Retailers ......................................................
Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Retailers
Sporting Goods, Hobby, and Musical Instrument
Retailers.
Book Retailers and News Dealers ........................
Florists ...................................................................
Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Retailers .....
Used Merchandise Retailers .................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00253
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Average
revenue per
establishment
Costs as %
of revenue
122
944
2,425
826
104
721
408
5,083
1,085,733
8,246,263
27,059,128
12,167,578
1,429,522
11,788,451
1,037,801
13,274,090
8,899
8,740
11,161
14,731
13,812
16,361
2,547
2,611
454,487,339
29,205,076
61,631,308
93,792,988
63,611,383
21,809,920
15,117,084
4,297,730
0.00
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.02
0.06
1,767
5,200,805
2,943
7,971,335
0.04
366
5,090
8,780
2,351
1,792,138
13,095,541
13,579,420
26,489,257
4,903
2,573
1,547
11,269
15,572,532
10,884,255
4,017,213
45,407,480
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.02
1,298
9,523,083
7,336
10,625,767
0.07
1,736
13,456,090
7,749
13,371,930
0.06
3,513
25,485,899
7,255
20,295,064
0.04
958
8,692,950
9,072
27,671,464
0.03
2,879
28,074,222
9,752
27,451,825
0.04
1,951
13,236,652
6,783
11,557,780
0.06
5,776
58,234,641
10,082
11,596,411
0.09
3,188
16,166,409
5,071
9,310,978
0.05
967
1,019
8,226,081
14,966,530
8,507
14,683
19,885,243
110,821,278
0.04
0.01
1,534
8,083,432
5,269
13,145,411
0.04
3,517
45,101,982
12,823
34,945,484
0.04
613
4,961,179
8,089
41,951,216
0.02
1,223
9,926,609
8,115
23,780,447
0.03
638
6,705,416
10,506
203,610,923
0.01
451
11,640,093
25,813
43,026,015
0.06
2,852
20,258,440
7,103
15,167,514
0.05
3,957
7,943
2,484
10,382
15,142,900
70,381,781
10,727,937
38,063,251
3,827
8,860
4,319
3,666
21,159,691
26,031,796
6,684,856
2,310,332
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.16
10,300
3,493
26,774,594
10,491,710
2,599
3,003
5,880,598
3,918,834
0.04
0.08
16,712
4,575
6,050
9,532
5,359
892
9,875
111,429,709
10,190,815
7,676,768
20,849,798
13,310,629
11,243,234
55,995,417
6,668
2,227
1,269
2,187
2,484
12,610
5,670
8,142,684
2,565,311
2,103,423
3,437,969
3,870,143
17,685,253
12,141,433
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.05
17,607
18,856
1,393
16,339
4,397
4,259
7,353
26,342,201
34,130,245
2,870,053
44,247,522
9,190,469
6,611,743
16,879,497
1,496
1,810
2,061
2,708
2,090
1,552
2,296
4,568,247
5,062,894
4,568,306
2,473,681
2,227,506
2,704,423
3,294,022
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.11
0.09
0.06
0.07
1,515
2,383
5,104
3,668
3,229,542
4,426,367
10,013,108
7,796,516
2,131
1,857
1,962
2,126
2,950,989
1,442,716
2,084,249
1,521,114
0.07
0.13
0.09
0.14
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70950
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
4599
4811
4812
4821
4831
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
4832
4841
4842
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4859
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
4861
4862
4869
4871
4872
4879
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4889
4911
4921
4922
4931
5121
5122
5131
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
5132 ...................
5161 ...................
5162 ...................
5171 ...................
5174 ...................
5178 ...................
5182 ...................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
5192 ...................
5221
5222
5223
5231
...................
...................
...................
...................
5232
5239
5241
5242
...................
...................
...................
...................
5251
5259
5311
5312
5313
5321
5322
5323
5324
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
5331 ...................
5411 ...................
5412 ...................
5413 ...................
5414 ...................
5415 ...................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Establishments
Other Miscellaneous Retailers ..............................
Scheduled Air Transportation ...............................
Nonscheduled Air Transportation .........................
Rail Transportation ................................................
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water
Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation .................................
General Freight Trucking ......................................
Specialized Freight Trucking ................................
Urban Transit Systems .........................................
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation .............
Taxi and Limousine Service .................................
School and Employee Bus Transportation ...........
Charter Bus Industry .............................................
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation.
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil ....................
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas ................
Other Pipeline Transportation ...............................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land ......
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water ....
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other .....
Support Activities for Air Transportation ...............
Support Activities for Rail Transportation .............
Support Activities for Water Transportation ..........
Support Activities for Road Transportation ...........
Freight Transportation Arrangement .....................
Other Support Activities for Transportation ..........
Postal Service .......................................................
Couriers and Express Delivery Services ..............
Local Messengers and Local Delivery ..................
Warehousing and Storage ....................................
Motion Picture and Video Industries .....................
Sound Recording Industries .................................
Newspaper, Periodical, Book, and Directory Publishers.
Software Publishers ..............................................
Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations ........
Media Streaming Distribution Services, Social
Networks, and Other Media Networks and
Content Providers.
Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except
Satellite).
Satellite Telecommunications ...............................
All Other Telecommunications ..............................
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and
Other Information Services.
Depository Credit Intermediation ..........................
Nondepository Credit Intermediation ....................
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation ...........
Securities and Commodity Contracts Intermediation and Brokerage.
Securities and Commodity Exchanges .................
Other Financial Investment Activities ...................
Insurance Carriers ................................................
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds ..............
Other Investment Pools and Funds ......................
Lessors of Real Estate .........................................
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers ..........
Activities Related to Real Estate ..........................
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing .........
Consumer Goods Rental ......................................
General Rental Centers ........................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing.
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except
Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services ......................................................
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and
Payroll Services.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Specialized Design Services ................................
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00254
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Average
revenue per
establishment
Costs as %
of revenue
8,050
1,901
1,825
119
877
15,263,208
25,658,803
4,628,067
124,334
5,042,806
1,896
13,497
2,535
1,041
5,750
2,640,719
89,545,214
11,544,951
2,215,217
36,316,671
0.07
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
476
64,907
42,255
782
670
6,647
3,712
1,069
4,351
3,118,127
89,062,119
50,978,497
1,541,702
1,142,712
7,550,221
6,449,362
1,792,372
3,709,249
6,552
1,372
1,206
1,972
1,705
1,136
1,737
1,677
852
11,566,749
3,024,850
2,422,016
5,727,178
3,183,166
2,114,168
2,931,452
3,278,126
1,757,646
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
649
1,812
580
617
1,554
268
5,046
1,293
2,258
10,553
18,079
1,434
25,465
8,360
3,780
14,274
3,012
489
3,052
1,410,922
4,248,289
1,250,571
1,320,235
3,274,995
510,004
22,255,588
4,921,648
11,495,850
8,555,879
29,423,164
1,669,460
28,299,988
24,629,329
3,385,960
58,725,115
16,428,008
1,147,515
20,020,700
2,174
2,345
2,156
2,139
2,108
1,901
4,410
3,806
5,092
811
1,627
1,165
1,111
2,946
896
4,114
5,454
2,346
6,559
13,170,788
15,487,431
14,063,673
2,100,659
1,392,280
2,851,407
5,491,720
4,754,766
8,269,227
1,051,046
3,691,452
1,708,634
5,242,980
9,114,393
1,707,066
2,766,853
5,083,819
4,484,294
11,229,220
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.10
0.15
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.08
0.04
0.07
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.15
0.11
0.05
0.06
1,821
778
533
13,284,155
9,163,332
6,637,578
7,296
11,786
12,460
25,213,904
8,807,054
44,140,119
0.03
0.13
0.03
7,811
49,672,322
6,360
12,522,782
0.05
59
358
2,409
491,286
2,013,640
13,757,855
8,376
5,620
5,712
14,838,437
9,959,665
11,018,831
0.06
0.06
0.05
611
1,902,061
3,111
6,745,774
0.05
16,260
6,274
3,968
3,942
66,680,457
23,451,028
13,782,701
12,199,622
4,101
3,738
3,473
3,095
5,815,480
10,353,450
5,998,640
10,423,406
0.07
0.04
0.06
0.03
4
10,124
4,350
20,264
62,437
23,123,395
35,116,961
50,123,045
13,904
2,284
8,073
2,474
411,532,288
5,472,042
74,913,679
2,715,515
0.00
0.04
0.01
0.09
236
123
17,809
16,673
13,274
2,256
2,693
420
2,130
527,154
255,212
50,853,115
36,947,635
53,336,543
15,749,238
10,999,021
1,665,083
13,168,084
2,237
2,079
2,855
2,216
4,018
6,981
4,085
3,969
6,182
3,562,001
2,004,745
2,394,282
1,136,243
1,215,258
4,088,904
1,173,984
1,486,508
5,500,482
0.06
0.10
0.12
0.20
0.33
0.17
0.35
0.27
0.11
377
1,245,184
3,303
19,386,258
0.02
25,571
18,287
52,480,381
48,179,649
2,052
2,635
1,941,967
1,396,296
0.11
0.19
15,623
4,494
19,606
174,866,256
13,137,406
79,048,499
11,193
2,923
4,032
3,312,024
931,984
3,773,095
0.34
0.31
0.11
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70951
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
5416 ...................
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services ...
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services.
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services.
Management of Companies and Enterprises .......
Office Administrative Services ..............................
Facilities Support Services ...................................
Employment Services ...........................................
Business Support Services ...................................
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services ....
Investigation and Security Services ......................
Services to Buildings and Dwellings .....................
Other Support Services ........................................
Waste Collection ...................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ............................
Remediation and Other Waste Management
Services.
Elementary and Secondary Schools ....................
Junior Colleges .....................................................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools ...............................
Other Schools and Instruction ..............................
Educational Support Services ...............................
Offices of Physicians ............................................
Offices of Dentists .................................................
Offices of Other Health Practitioners ....................
Outpatient Care Centers .......................................
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories ...................
Home Health Care Services .................................
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services ..............
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals ..............
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ........
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance
Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities)
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability, Mental Health, and Substance Abuse
Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and
Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities ..........................
Individual and Family Services .............................
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency
and Other Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services .......................
Child Care Services ..............................................
Performing Arts Companies ..................................
Spectator Sports ...................................................
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events.
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers, and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers ......
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions.
Amusement Parks and Arcades ...........................
Gambling Industries ..............................................
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries ......
Traveler Accommodation ......................................
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps.
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and
Workers’ Camps.
Special Food Services ..........................................
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) .................
Restaurants and Other Eating Places ..................
Automotive Repair and Maintenance ...................
Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and
Maintenance.
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
5417 ...................
5418 ...................
5419 ...................
5511
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5619
5621
5622
5629
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
6111
6112
6113
6114
...................
...................
...................
...................
6115
6116
6117
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6219
6221
6222
6223
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
6231 ...................
6232 ...................
6233 ...................
6239 ...................
6241 ...................
6242 ...................
6243
6244
7111
7112
7113
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
7114 ...................
7115 ...................
7121 ...................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
7131
7132
7139
7211
7212
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
7213 ...................
7223
7224
7225
8111
8112
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
8113 ...................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Establishments
PO 00000
Frm 00255
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Average
revenue per
establishment
Costs as %
of revenue
24,060
100,628,588
4,182
1,787,507
0.23
2,556
5,218
33,102,069
30,433,443
12,948
5,833
10,398,760
3,373,336
0.12
0.17
9,861
64,294,316
6,520
1,535,518
0.42
7,687
4,694
928
7,276
4,372
3,108
3,513
27,351
2,751
1,605
358
1,496
181,889,901
13,289,558
17,834,897
344,829,125
13,798,527
6,673,364
73,921,446
173,828,441
17,358,050
5,725,756
2,044,381
10,192,723
23,662
2,831
19,228
47,393
3,156
2,147
21,042
6,355
6,309
3,567
5,704
6,814
2,601,094
2,192,216
5,252,912
8,776,960
2,727,986
2,592,365
2,971,429
922,181
2,809,043
5,516,059
6,960,982
3,165,201
0.91
0.13
0.37
0.54
0.12
0.08
0.71
0.69
0.22
0.06
0.08
0.22
3,291
120
661
1,248
40,472,071
1,194,543
32,001,201
2,668,673
12,297
9,970
48,400
2,138
4,413,940
8,501,343
69,334,614
1,826,775
0.28
0.12
0.07
0.12
1,228
7,639
1,310
9,917
6,017
6,967
2,008
767
1,474
507
245
27
37
4,444,652
17,939,335
3,196,265
25,952,877
16,631,978
15,574,576
14,460,890
4,775,293
39,821,728
6,057,721
65,020,765
5,602,159
3,694,704
3,619
2,348
2,439
2,617
2,764
2,235
7,201
6,226
27,010
11,957
265,020
207,993
99,601
1,991,961
592,020
2,241,261
2,598,098
1,123,388
650,896
4,256,944
3,788,420
3,024,173
4,132,554
218,034,685
45,105,867
61,909,640
0.18
0.40
0.11
0.10
0.25
0.34
0.17
0.16
0.89
0.29
0.12
0.46
0.16
752
1,863
35,736,039
22,918,890
47,496
12,302
8,679,090
1,273,215
0.55
0.97
1,120
26,868,839
23,984
3,060,931
0.78
227
3,329
650
4,128,616
57,309,240
6,458,493
18,174
17,218
9,929
1,856,976
1,658,588
2,982,906
0.98
1.04
0.33
328
3,406
4,832
2,206
4,362
7,785,986
61,315,616
6,157,218
5,962,390
8,735,781
23,739
18,003
1,274
2,703
2,003
2,100,542
652,479
2,085,725
12,928,871
4,539,819
1.13
2.76
0.06
0.02
0.04
2,223
2,215,936
997
2,365,997
0.04
15,379
4,091
14,540,701
7,846,087
945
1,918
848,451
3,102,080
0.11
0.06
2,347
1,638
39,654
21,598
2,754
15,577,978
3,926,485
70,323,368
63,177,043
2,698,715
6,639
2,398
1,773
2,925
980
5,344,729
9,343,172
1,310,750
5,123,987
1,029,528
0.12
0.03
0.14
0.06
0.10
746
791,148
1,061
994,545
0.11
16,532
14,785
210,896
74,001
5,811
29,428,448
14,060,549
409,134,932
126,236,663
11,875,534
1,780
951
1,940
1,706
2,044
1,586,703
739,078
1,274,637
873,479
1,945,895
0.11
0.13
0.15
0.20
0.11
9,972
25,065,047
2,514
2,202,353
0.11
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70952
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.1—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON ESTABLISHMENTS AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
8114 ...................
9992 ...................
9993 ...................
Personal and Household Goods Repair and
Maintenance.
Personal Care Services ........................................
Death Care Services .............................................
Drycleaning and Laundry Services .......................
Other Personal Services .......................................
Religious Organizations ........................................
Grantmaking and Giving Services ........................
Social Advocacy Organizations ............................
Civic and Social Organizations .............................
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and
Similar Organizations.
State Government .................................................
Local Government .................................................
Total ............
...............................................................................
8121
8122
8123
8129
8131
8132
8133
8134
8139
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Establishments
Total
annualized
costs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
1,267
559,118
0.23
60,820
9,602
15,411
21,448
84,819
9,147
8,168
12,043
26,876
71,616,377
18,086,417
21,745,744
31,265,564
139,934,279
11,510,923
11,803,888
18,907,950
37,917,962
1,178
1,884
1,411
1,458
1,650
1,258
1,445
1,570
1,411
360,641
1,109,180
916,522
691,008
975,827
7,324,606
2,343,993
859,416
2,057,484
0.33
0.17
0.15
0.21
0.17
0.02
0.06
0.18
0.07
8
5,172
169,386,525
504,582,765
20,359,760
97,561
80,797,224,446
64,081,034
0.03
0.15
2,535,774
7,823,661,638
3,085
7,392,091
0.04
agency’s 2016 Silica rule showed cost-to-revenue
ratios as high as 1.29 percent for small entities and
2.09 percent for very small entities (see OSHA’s
Final Economic and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
for its Silica rule, chapter VI, tables VI–7 and VI–
8, pp. VI–87–VI–94, Document ID OSHA–2010–
0034–4247, attachment 6).
PO 00000
Frm 00256
Costs as %
of revenue
12,454,292
OSHA notes that cost impacts for
affected small or very small entities will
generally tend to be somewhat higher,
The preceding discussion focused on
on average, than the cost impacts for the
the economic viability of each affected
average business in those affected
industry in its entirety, including
industries. That is to be expected. After
entities of all sizes. Even though OSHA
all, smaller businesses typically suffer
has found that the proposed standard
from diseconomies of scale in many
does not threaten the economic viability aspects of their business, leading to
of these industries, the agency also
lower revenue per dollar of cost and
examines whether there is still a
higher average costs. Small businesses
possibility that the competitive
are able to overcome these obstacles by
structure of these industries could be
providing specialized products and
significantly altered. For instance, in
services, offering local service and better
some industries, if most or all small
service, or otherwise creating a market
firms in that industry would have to
niche for themselves. In a dynamic
close, it could reasonably be concluded
environment, they also tend to benefit
that the competitive structure of the
from less institutional inertia. The
industry had been affected by the
higher cost impacts for smaller
proposed standard.
businesses estimated for this standard
To address this possibility, OSHA
generally fall within the range observed
examines the average compliance costs
in other OSHA standards, and OSHA is
per affected small entity and very small
not aware of any record of major
entity for each industry covered under
industry failures resulting from those
the final standard. See Section VIII.B.,
standards.92 For industries that are
Profile of Affected Industries for a
below the thresholds for the cost-todiscussion of OSHA’s methodology for
revenue test, the agency concludes that
estimating the number of small and very the costs of complying with the
small entities.
proposed standard are unlikely to
threaten the survival of small entities or
As with its analysis of all
very small entities and are,
establishments, the agency relies on a
consequently, unlikely to alter the
screening test—costs less than one
competitive structure of the affected
percent of revenue—to evaluate the
industries.
impacts on small and very small
As discussed further in Section
entities.91 As with the screening tests for
VIII.F., Initial Regulatory Flexibility
establishments of all sizes, in cases
Analysis, the agency is required by the
where the small and very small entities
Regulatory Flexibility Act to determine
in particular industries are above the
whether a proposed standard would
threshold level for the primary
screening test, OSHA will investigate
92 For example, OSHA’s economic analysis for the
further.
91 The agency calculates the average per-entity
revenues for small and very small entities in each
NAICS industry in the same manner that it
calculated the average per-establishment revenues
for its analysis of all establishments, above.
Average
revenue per
establishment
9,830
B. Economic Feasibility Screening
Analysis: Small and Very Small Entities
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Average
annualized
cost per
establishment
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
likely have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. As an extension of the
feasibility screening analysis, the agency
also performed a screening analysis of
costs as a percentage of revenues of
small entities. Table VIII.D.2. and table
VIII.D.3. show that parallel to the
previous analysis of costs as percent of
average revenues for all establishments,
for all but seven (out of 298) of the
covered NAICS industries, the cost-torevenue ratios are generally well below
OSHA’s screening threshold of one
percent, suggesting that compliance
with this standard would be feasible for
small and very small entities in all of
these industries. Since the impact is
somewhat higher on average to small
entities, two industries, Home Health
Care Services (NAICS 6216) and Other
Residential Care Facilities (NAICS
6239), had costs marginally above one
percent, in addition to the five listed
previously for the feasibility screening
test for all establishments. A slightly
different mix (four of 298) presents for
Very Small Entities, the two agriculture
industries listed previously and two of
the four health care and social service
industries, Other Residential Care
Facilities (NAICS 6239) and Child Care
Services (NAICS 6244) having costs of
more than one percent as a percent of
revenues.
While the impacts are marginally
greater for small entities, the general
profile does not differ significantly from
the issues with larger entities,
suggesting that the proposed standard
does not pose unique challenges for
small entities. (This result is consistent
with the costs being overwhelmingly
employee based, as opposed to
establishment based (see Section VIII.C.,
Costs of Compliance)).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Table VIII.D.2. shows that the
estimated average cost of complying
with the proposed standard for the
average small entity in all industries
covered by the standard is $1,946
annually, and table VIII.D.3. shows that
the estimated average cost of the
standard for the average very small
entity is $1,178 annually.
The tables further show that for all
small entities in covered NAICS
industries, the cost-to-revenue ratios are
below OSHA’s one percent screening
threshold, except for the seven
industries previously discussed,
suggesting that compliance with this
proposed standard would be feasible for
small entities in these industries.
As is typical with new requirements,
the costs will be borne primarily by
those businesses that have lagged in
implementing safety measures. See Lead
I, 647 F.2d at 1265 (‘‘ ‘It would appear
to be consistent with the purposes of the
[OSH] Act to envisage the economic
demise of an employer who has lagged
behind the rest of the industry in
protecting the health and safety of
employees and is consequently
financially unable to comply with new
standards as quickly as other
employers.’ ’’) (quoting Indus. Union
Dep’t, AFL–CIO v. Hodgson, 499 F.2d
467, 478 (D.C. Cir. 1974)). Indeed, one
of the main differentiations between
businesses similarly situated in the
same industry, where one would be
exempt from this proposed standard
while the other would not, would be in
situations where one employer has
invested in air conditioning that keeps
their facility below the heat trigger
while the other has forgone those
investments. The businesses that have
already incurred many of the costs of
compliance will presumably be at low
risk of going out of business as a result
70953
of the standard. Even when small or
very small entities in particular
industries are above the revenue
screening threshold, it would be very
unlikely that this proposed standard
would result in the alteration of the
economic structure of these industries
based on the failure of most or all of the
small or very small entities in those
industries.
Moreover, OSHA has considered
input from SBA-defined small entities
who participated in the SBREFA
process, with regard to the potential
provisions of a regulatory framework for
a heat standard. OSHA’s adjustments to
the regulatory framework presented
during the panel, along with a set of
regulatory alternatives and options
drafted and analyzed in response to
recommendations from the SBAR Panel,
are also discussed in Section VIII.F.,
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
TABLE VIII.D.2—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
NAICS
1111
1112
1113
1114
1119
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1129
1131
1132
1133
1141
1142
1151
1152
1153
2111
2131
2211
2212
2213
2361
2362
2371
2372
2373
2379
2381
2382
2383
2389
3111
3112
3113
3114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3121
3122
3131
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Entities
Oilseed and Grain Farming .................................................
Vegetable and Melon Farming ............................................
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming ................................................
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production ............
Other Crop Farming ............................................................
Cattle Ranching and Farming .............................................
Hog and Pig Farming ..........................................................
Poultry and Egg Production ................................................
Sheep and Goat Farming ....................................................
Aquaculture .........................................................................
Other Animal Production .....................................................
Timber Tract Operations .....................................................
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products ...........
Logging ................................................................................
Fishing .................................................................................
Hunting and Trapping ..........................................................
Support Activities for Crop Production ................................
Support Activities for Animal Production .............................
Support Activities for Forestry .............................................
Oil and Gas Extraction ........................................................
Support Activities for Mining ...............................................
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution
Natural Gas Distribution ......................................................
Water, Sewage and Other Systems ...................................
Residential Building Construction .......................................
Nonresidential Building Construction ..................................
Utility System Construction .................................................
Land Subdivision .................................................................
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction ..........................
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction ...............
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors ..
Building Equipment Contractors ..........................................
Building Finishing Contractors ............................................
Other Specialty Trade Contractors .....................................
Animal Food Manufacturing ................................................
Grain and Oilseed Milling ....................................................
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing ...............
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing ...............................................
Animal Slaughtering and Processing ..................................
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging .....................
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing ...................................
Other Food Manufacturing ..................................................
Beverage Manufacturing .....................................................
Tobacco Manufacturing .......................................................
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills .............................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00257
Fmt 4701
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue
per entity
Costs as %
of revenue
12,511
2,127
6,121
2,720
9,564
18,428
1,048
2,278
1,548
160
4,913
442
150
7,980
2,432
351
4,648
4,640
1,658
5,307
10,921
2,058
418
3,668
171,099
40,735
16,774
4,805
8,285
4,056
91,279
177,612
114,496
68,126
636
250
868
743
$13,585,428
9,980,549
14,284,547
12,359,299
15,497,239
28,781,484
2,182,612
4,700,946
2,393,222
616,482
7,999,112
439,946
152,566
7,648,751
1,113,045
374,292
5,853,520
3,376,198
1,398,749
16,476,736
43,981,568
28,171,559
3,527,573
7,573,926
106,947,179
62,520,995
34,191,049
3,170,977
17,087,777
6,569,839
125,277,109
233,824,679
106,453,318
72,672,079
1,601,425
1,211,561
2,204,453
3,725,663
$1,086
4,693
2,334
4,544
1,620
1,562
2,082
2,064
1,546
3,859
1,628
996
1,017
958
458
1,066
1,259
728
844
3,105
4,027
13,690
8,436
2,065
625
1,535
2,038
660
2,062
1,620
1,372
1,316
930
1,067
2,520
4,854
2,539
5,016
$759,359
1,153,664
682,745
741,146
282,465
700,078
2,601,611
2,939,009
88,910
1,133,734
115,067
1,501,147
790,399
1,563,286
853,204
799,221
2,707,767
506,802
1,111,045
26,579,145
3,821,423
76,221,412
70,106,856
1,410,992
1,421,852
6,719,320
3,633,655
1,877,172
6,724,608
3,024,764
1,699,487
1,621,258
1,078,107
1,929,027
24,357,224
62,037,403
9,556,299
25,690,434
0.14
0.41
0.34
0.61
0.57
0.22
0.08
0.07
1.74
0.34
1.41
0.07
0.13
0.06
0.05
0.13
0.05
0.14
0.08
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.01
0.15
0.04
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.02
588
1,456
221
5,471
1,655
4,226
58
102
2,637,411
12,280,924
902,567
11,517,147
5,268,917
6,542,557
515,881
1,037,014
4,484
8,438
4,087
2,105
3,183
1,548
8,848
10,139
49,929,979
38,292,294
22,008,470
3,818,211
16,374,321
8,758,819
182,294,825
19,374,286
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.05
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70954
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.2—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3132
3133
3141
3149
3152
3159
3161
3162
3211
3212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3219
3221
3222
3231
3241
3251
3252
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3253 ..................
3254 ..................
3255 ..................
3256 ..................
3259
3261
3262
3271
3272
3273
3274
3279
3311
3312
3313
3314
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3315
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3328 ..................
3329 ..................
3331 ..................
3332 ..................
3334 ..................
3335 ..................
3336 ..................
3339
3341
3342
3343
3344
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
3345 ..................
3352
3353
3359
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3369
3371
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Fabric Mills ..........................................................................
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating Mills ........
Textile Furnishings Mills ......................................................
Other Textile Product Mills ..................................................
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing ..................................
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing .....
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing ............................
Footwear Manufacturing ......................................................
Sawmills and Wood Preservation .......................................
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing.
Other Wood Product Manufacturing ...................................
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills .....................................
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing ............................
Printing and Related Support Activities ..............................
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing .....................
Basic Chemical Manufacturing ............................................
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing .....................
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing ......................
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing ...
Plastics Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Rubber Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing .......................
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing ............................
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing ...................
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing .........................
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing .............
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing .............
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased Steel ...........
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing ...........
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production and
Processing.
Foundries .............................................................................
Forging and Stamping .........................................................
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing ..................................
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing .............
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing .........
Hardware Manufacturing .....................................................
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing .............................
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and
Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities ....
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing ..................
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing ....................................
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial
Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing ..............................
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment
Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing .............
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing ..........
Communications Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Household Appliance Manufacturing ..................................
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing ....................................
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing ..............................................
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing ..................
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing .....................................
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing .....................
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing .................................
Ship and Boat Building ........................................................
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing .................
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen Cabinet
Manufacturing.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00258
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue
per entity
Costs as %
of revenue
345
378
769
1,981
1,485
279
75
102
1,425
169
1,937,288
1,346,267
2,410,151
2,870,758
1,708,817
488,329
78,767
410,499
5,001,937
1,273,144
5,609
3,565
3,134
1,449
1,151
1,750
1,048
4,029
3,510
7,533
12,945,642
7,871,921
5,547,861
2,012,712
907,132
1,772,440
6,384,614
5,074,485
7,582,835
21,682,868
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.13
0.10
0.02
0.08
0.05
0.03
4,412
35
1,264
12,027
464
642
530
11,586,726
855,082
6,774,484
11,573,349
3,199,326
4,655,288
4,077,855
2,626
24,193
5,360
962
6,895
7,251
7,695
4,072,371
136,863,576
24,890,031
2,522,782
177,980,216
78,530,261
52,682,176
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.00
0.01
0.01
355
1,140,904
3,217
18,940,264
0.02
925
705
1,002
5,779,821
2,479,397
3,477,371
6,251
3,516
3,470
51,766,648
16,249,794
17,908,986
0.01
0.02
0.02
872
4,134
699
463
706
2,173
74
1,369
191
246
155
309
2,542,871
19,980,060
3,192,709
1,199,726
1,989,379
8,394,899
303,318
3,198,469
2,633,059
1,720,852
1,282,335
1,616,110
2,916
4,833
4,565
2,590
2,819
3,863
4,126
2,336
13,753
6,991
8,290
5,227
12,165,378
13,921,131
12,772,546
5,587,274
6,976,531
8,676,117
15,209,592
5,186,460
115,596,140
28,374,263
35,439,130
39,316,152
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
691
991
529
5,974
589
272
492
11,032
2,989,596
2,784,200
928,777
16,517,707
2,689,023
770,518
1,152,112
15,208,419
4,329
2,810
1,755
2,765
4,567
2,836
2,340
1,379
11,281,321
10,193,180
5,517,119
5,735,883
12,577,513
8,866,155
6,269,990
2,901,748
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.05
2,521
2,806
1,247
5,835,961
7,766,243
5,944,680
2,315
2,767
4,766
4,178,955
7,493,462
18,417,556
0.06
0.04
0.03
425
699
1,030,865
3,921,041
2,425
5,609
10,195,646
15,601,508
0.02
0.04
3,010
337
4,202,594
1,582,741
1,396
4,698
4,357,322
25,365,617
0.03
0.02
1,762
415
547
219
1,680
5,979,770
490,089
1,256,142
262,564
4,552,187
3,394
1,182
2,294
1,198
2,709
12,034,903
8,911,705
13,522,113
5,604,208
13,079,398
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
2,157
4,626,878
2,145
12,820,769
0.02
101
852
752
23
803
1,978
646
74
658
392
4,766
332,021
2,906,501
2,497,573
51,856
4,874,596
13,487,337
3,977,519
567,108
7,118,392
641,075
9,401,064
3,290
3,411
3,319
2,260
6,071
6,817
6,160
7,707
10,818
1,635
1,972
14,304,913
10,715,020
12,404,672
58,221,416
15,741,094
32,394,740
29,941,829
33,655,605
14,164,896
6,718,062
2,859,010
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.02
0.07
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70955
TABLE VIII.D.2—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3372
3379
3391
3399
4231
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4232 ..................
4233 ..................
4234 ..................
4235 ..................
4236 ..................
4237 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4238 ..................
4239
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4249
4251
4411
4412
4441
4451
4452
4811
4812
4821
4831
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4832
4841
4842
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4859
4861
4862
4869
4871
4872
4879
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4889
4921
4922
4931
5121
5122
5174
5182
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5221
5222
5223
5232
5239
5241
5242
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing ............
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing .................
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing ................
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing ....................................
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers .....
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant
Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies
Merchant Wholesalers.
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic
Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers .......
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers ..............
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers ......
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers ........
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers ...........
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers ........
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers ................................
Automobile Dealers .............................................................
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers ...............................................
Building Material and Supplies Dealers ..............................
Grocery and Convenience Retailers ...................................
Specialty Food Retailers .....................................................
Scheduled Air Transportation ..............................................
Nonscheduled Air Transportation ........................................
Rail Transportation ..............................................................
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation ................................................
General Freight Trucking ....................................................
Specialized Freight Trucking ...............................................
Urban Transit Systems ........................................................
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation ...........................
Taxi and Limousine Service ................................................
School and Employee Bus Transportation .........................
Charter Bus Industry ...........................................................
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation ........
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil ...................................
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas ...............................
Other Pipeline Transportation .............................................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land ....................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water ..................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other ...................
Support Activities for Air Transportation .............................
Support Activities for Rail Transportation ...........................
Support Activities for Water Transportation ........................
Support Activities for Road Transportation .........................
Freight Transportation Arrangement ...................................
Other Support Activities for Transportation .........................
Couriers and Express Delivery Services ............................
Local Messengers and Local Delivery ................................
Warehousing and Storage ..................................................
Motion Picture and Video Industries ...................................
Sound Recording Industries ................................................
Satellite Telecommunications ..............................................
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing,
Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Depository Credit Intermediation .........................................
Nondepository Credit Intermediation ...................................
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation ..........................
Securities and Commodity Exchanges ...............................
Other Financial Investment Activities ..................................
Insurance Carriers ...............................................................
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00259
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue
per entity
Costs as %
of revenue
1,690
326
4,621
8,582
1,544
3,989,090
1,166,170
7,495,312
11,161,673
11,511,623
2,360
3,581
1,622
1,301
7,456
5,125,287
8,591,445
4,733,183
2,660,648
8,053,146
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.09
1,077
993
5,781,729
5,631,821
5,367
5,671
5,828,655
6,885,143
0.09
0.08
2,259
10,168,859
4,501
5,929,082
0.08
709
4,763,004
6,715
13,288,617
0.05
1,907
11,364,290
5,960
8,540,329
0.07
1,026
5,820,745
5,674
6,361,789
0.09
4,033
29,834,160
7,398
5,737,517
0.13
2,831
717
662
386
2,662
325
809
376
326
10,561,663
3,784,639
4,340,575
1,344,807
15,934,090
2,641,457
4,315,458
3,206,820
3,172,050
3,731
5,277
6,561
3,483
5,986
8,119
5,336
8,522
9,724
5,222,434
5,821,550
10,574,055
5,167,182
10,630,078
23,756,996
8,980,738
61,864,570
13,306,719
0.07
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.06
0.01
0.07
2,124
3,749
6,500
955
544
6,886
1,180
727
1,637
113
606
10,353,521
9,368,912
37,276,607
3,490,111
1,021,683
22,913,996
2,429,585
10,339,037
3,179,136
78,448
2,154,113
4,876
2,499
5,735
3,656
1,877
3,328
2,059
14,225
1,942
697
3,553
5,895,079
12,764,272
15,961,277
5,414,403
2,831,193
3,311,379
1,053,778
97,899,634
6,496,273
1,132,927
16,994,169
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.07
0.10
0.20
0.01
0.03
0.06
0.02
410
55,843
39,386
513
488
6,453
2,232
978
3,856
70
59
71
572
1,479
229
3,639
494
1,852
9,012
12,925
1,387
3,724
3,431
9,681
2,568
466
46
1,352
1,791,814
50,365,637
41,886,506
590,618
896,937
7,243,177
3,191,204
1,507,466
3,185,344
347,281
90,847
269,120
1,034,717
2,781,692
354,470
7,427,615
1,414,555
6,207,901
6,993,625
18,974,056
1,669,460
12,926,412
3,012,249
56,004,514
7,638,794
946,190
165,892
3,731,170
4,371
902
1,063
1,151
1,837
1,122
1,430
1,541
826
4,984
1,528
3,788
1,808
1,881
1,551
2,041
2,861
3,353
776
1,468
1,203
3,471
878
5,785
2,975
2,032
3,602
2,759
6,386,189
1,458,914
1,812,364
2,151,325
2,488,321
862,937
2,019,525
2,813,587
1,343,491
28,045,336
15,269,599
22,870,110
1,542,634
961,471
1,442,518
2,726,627
3,694,856
4,619,864
1,019,225
2,467,206
1,765,588
9,170,589
1,312,866
3,692,460
1,544,741
1,914,032
3,473,723
2,821,642
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.07
0.13
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.12
0.20
0.11
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.07
0.16
0.19
0.11
0.10
0.10
1,562
1,085
1,822
1
1,542
724
18,002
21,857,409
3,521,500
4,068,120
26,178
3,322,810
7,767,572
37,871,610
13,995
3,245
2,232
39,745
2,154
10,729
2,104
15,334,364
2,825,317
1,274,881
753,808,884
3,014,962
64,751,762
884,543
0.09
0.11
0.18
0.01
0.07
0.02
0.24
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70956
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.2—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
5251
5259
5311
5312
5313
5321
5322
5323
5324
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5331 ..................
5411 ..................
5412 ..................
5413
5414
5415
5416
..................
..................
..................
..................
5417
5418
5419
5511
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5619
5621
5622
5629
6111
6112
6113
6114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6115
6116
6117
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6219
6221
6222
6223
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6231 ..................
6232 ..................
6233 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
6239 ..................
6241 ..................
6242 ..................
6243
6244
7111
7112
7113
7114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7115
7121
7131
7132
7139
7211
7212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds .............................
Other Investment Pools and Funds ....................................
Lessors of Real Estate ........................................................
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers ........................
Activities Related to Real Estate .........................................
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing ........................
Consumer Goods Rental .....................................................
General Rental Centers ......................................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment
Rental and Leasing.
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services .....................................................................
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll
Services.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services ..............
Specialized Design Services ...............................................
Computer Systems Design and Related Services ..............
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services .................
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services ..........
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services ......
Management of Companies and Enterprises .....................
Office Administrative Services ............................................
Facilities Support Services ..................................................
Employment Services ..........................................................
Business Support Services .................................................
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services ..................
Investigation and Security Services ....................................
Services to Buildings and Dwellings ...................................
Other Support Services .......................................................
Waste Collection .................................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ...........................................
Remediation and Other Waste Management Services ......
Elementary and Secondary Schools ...................................
Junior Colleges ....................................................................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools ...............
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools .............................................
Other Schools and Instruction .............................................
Educational Support Services .............................................
Offices of Physicians ...........................................................
Offices of Dentists ...............................................................
Offices of Other Health Practitioners ..................................
Outpatient Care Centers .....................................................
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories ..................................
Home Health Care Services ...............................................
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services .............................
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals .............................
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ......................
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities) .............
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability,
Mental Health, and Substance Abuse Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted
Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities ........................................
Individual and Family Services ...........................................
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency and Other
Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services ......................................
Child Care Services ............................................................
Performing Arts Companies ................................................
Spectator Sports ..................................................................
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers,
and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers .....................
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions ............
Amusement Parks and Arcades .........................................
Gambling Industries ............................................................
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries .....................
Traveler Accommodation ....................................................
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00260
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue
per entity
Costs as %
of revenue
161
122
13,445
14,553
10,787
567
1,185
318
1,171
187,816
253,899
32,370,835
27,775,521
33,316,314
2,987,344
5,301,598
1,344,257
5,466,318
1,164
2,075
2,408
1,909
3,088
5,267
4,475
4,222
4,667
860,458
1,915,830
1,498,519
848,299
865,500
2,647,455
1,093,599
1,436,198
3,114,198
0.14
0.11
0.16
0.22
0.36
0.20
0.41
0.29
0.15
315
671,532
2,130
3,900,891
0.05
23,897
15,652
49,298,948
36,586,403
2,063
2,338
1,105,731
715,353
0.19
0.33
12,833
4,402
16,220
22,491
75,874,312
11,949,232
39,798,676
62,683,511
5,913
2,715
2,454
2,787
1,482,804
783,080
1,363,070
917,797
0.40
0.35
0.18
0.30
2,115
4,587
8,774
932
4,204
296
3,752
3,342
1,972
2,773
26,019
2,399
1,078
181
1,259
2,856
61
178
1,150
15,224,604
16,632,694
45,327,608
7,466,268
10,143,593
3,898,123
42,559,048
5,943,802
3,129,421
25,002,454
112,901,810
7,136,600
2,523,921
743,227
6,361,525
34,194,636
567,155
641,408
2,051,773
7,199
3,626
5,166
8,009
2,413
13,148
11,344
1,778
1,587
9,018
4,339
2,975
2,342
4,112
5,055
11,975
9,272
3,603
1,785
5,734,418
1,610,062
1,037,261
7,794,296
1,807,749
4,474,249
2,963,924
1,306,752
1,663,607
1,245,244
671,194
1,533,830
3,245,312
3,879,488
2,114,365
4,338,191
7,096,235
3,148,365
1,184,543
0.13
0.23
0.50
0.10
0.13
0.29
0.38
0.14
0.10
0.72
0.65
0.19
0.07
0.11
0.24
0.28
0.13
0.11
0.15
1,020
7,124
1,184
7,538
5,517
5,985
799
326
1,021
290
58
10
6
3,125,752
15,777,099
2,055,225
16,396,965
15,448,753
13,236,859
6,631,683
1,639,918
21,196,909
2,399,519
3,146,213
1,136,474
408,435
3,063
2,215
1,736
2,175
2,800
2,212
8,303
5,023
20,756
8,280
54,588
118,967
64,547
1,475,233
471,098
994,278
1,557,548
1,107,348
610,067
3,531,393
2,880,366
1,947,504
2,122,696
31,988,544
26,840,059
24,345,151
0.21
0.47
0.17
0.14
0.25
0.36
0.24
0.17
1.07
0.39
0.17
0.44
0.27
377
454
15,692,040
12,424,041
41,623
27,345
7,737,051
2,746,969
0.54
1.00
779
13,425,442
17,232
2,104,725
0.82
136
2,496
480
3,155,732
39,826,256
5,254,947
23,216
15,956
10,949
2,165,006
1,571,030
2,633,784
1.07
1.02
0.42
172
2,687
4,679
2,011
4,046
2,119
4,469,310
51,565,482
5,483,031
2,409,683
5,398,753
2,111,109
25,964
19,189
1,172
1,198
1,334
996
2,335,393
676,561
1,560,279
2,328,568
2,099,056
1,445,877
1.11
2.84
0.08
0.05
0.06
0.07
15,342
3,845
1,742
1,000
34,659
17,375
2,543
14,460,165
6,836,964
3,288,557
2,273,300
51,264,046
32,853,003
2,405,045
942
1,778
1,888
2,272
1,479
1,891
946
835,413
2,394,793
1,040,189
5,012,918
1,051,729
2,184,689
991,813
0.11
0.07
0.18
0.05
0.14
0.09
0.10
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70957
TABLE VIII.D.2—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
7213 ..................
9993 ..................
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers’ Camps.
Special Food Services ........................................................
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) ...............................
Restaurants and Other Eating Places ................................
Automotive Repair and Maintenance ..................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance
Personal Care Services ......................................................
Death Care Services ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Laundry Services .....................................
Other Personal Services .....................................................
Religious Organizations ......................................................
Grantmaking and Giving Services ......................................
Social Advocacy Organizations ...........................................
Civic and Social Organizations ...........................................
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and Similar Organizations.
Local Government ...............................................................
Total ...........
..............................................................................................
7223
7224
7225
8111
8113
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
8114
8121
8122
8123
8129
8131
8132
8133
8134
8139
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue
per entity
Costs as %
of revenue
687
741,076
1,079
930,215
0.12
7,295
14,383
157,253
62,789
8,982
8,312,585
13,061,680
276,972,590
100,273,474
14,997,313
1,139
908
1,761
1,597
1,670
857,031
663,521
1,144,923
798,630
1,261,858
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.20
0.13
9,417
52,932
6,955
13,051
16,792
83,837
7,839
6,903
11,030
25,710
11,449,589
64,529,881
13,214,986
16,733,433
22,209,398
126,171,312
8,889,289
8,993,435
15,706,906
33,664,444
1,216
1,219
1,900
1,282
1,323
1,505
1,134
1,303
1,424
1,309
455,661
346,123
1,130,650
564,862
509,230
722,894
3,473,007
1,442,084
697,379
1,384,987
0.27
0.35
0.17
0.23
0.26
0.21
0.03
0.09
0.20
0.09
4,846
132,114,558
27,261
17,292,921
0.16
1,985,235
3,863,384,856
1,946
2,403,819
0.08
Source: OSHA estimate.
TABLE VIII.D.3—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
NAICS
1111
1112
1113
1114
1119
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1129
1131
1132
1133
1141
1142
1151
1152
1153
2111
2131
2211
2212
2213
2361
2362
2371
2372
2373
2379
2381
2382
2383
2389
3111
3112
3113
3114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3115
3116
3117
3118
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Entities
Oilseed and Grain Farming .................................................
Vegetable and Melon Farming ............................................
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming ................................................
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production ............
Other Crop Farming ............................................................
Cattle Ranching and Farming .............................................
Hog and Pig Farming ..........................................................
Poultry and Egg Production ................................................
Sheep and Goat Farming ....................................................
Aquaculture .........................................................................
Other Animal Production .....................................................
Timber Tract Operations .....................................................
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products ...........
Logging ................................................................................
Fishing .................................................................................
Hunting and Trapping ..........................................................
Support Activities for Crop Production ................................
Support Activities for Animal Production .............................
Support Activities for Forestry .............................................
Oil and Gas Extraction ........................................................
Support Activities for Mining ...............................................
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution
Natural Gas Distribution ......................................................
Water, Sewage and Other Systems ...................................
Residential Building Construction .......................................
Nonresidential Building Construction ..................................
Utility System Construction .................................................
Land Subdivision .................................................................
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction ..........................
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction ...............
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors ..
Building Equipment Contractors ..........................................
Building Finishing Contractors ............................................
Other Specialty Trade Contractors .....................................
Animal Food Manufacturing ................................................
Grain and Oilseed Milling ....................................................
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing ...............
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing ...............................................
Animal Slaughtering and Processing ..................................
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging .....................
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing ...................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00261
Fmt 4701
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
7,184
1,227
3,060
1,545
5,537
10,474
585
1,356
856
91
2,806
429
144
7,530
2,416
331
4,102
4,531
1,534
4,571
8,845
832
267
3,468
167,394
34,810
13,929
4,615
6,251
3,581
83,470
161,684
108,028
62,342
377
130
652
441
$6,027,437
3,233,900
4,119,361
4,149,308
6,434,964
11,742,592
921,175
2,018,022
968,612
239,911
3,272,814
403,940
104,419
6,292,246
1,100,212
292,626
3,213,003
2,962,939
1,037,673
6,341,178
14,462,495
2,254,730
546,792
5,937,995
90,561,837
32,498,908
14,564,718
2,626,758
5,486,633
3,418,173
72,226,262
141,354,524
74,449,281
43,480,559
349,776
273,983
541,708
532,718
$839
2,636
1,346
2,686
1,162
1,121
1,575
1,488
1,131
2,630
1,166
942
725
836
455
885
783
654
676
1,387
1,635
2,709
2,049
1,712
541
934
1,046
569
878
954
865
874
689
697
928
2,115
831
1,207
$609,184
705,291
384,931
513,448
198,860
523,461
2,022,974
2,264,037
59,994
875,290
88,841
1,293,445
679,386
1,170,494
667,346
619,029
1,530,220
405,439
765,904
2,574,156
937,066
13,316,386
10,690,728
850,747
1,043,976
2,948,013
1,657,874
1,167,179
2,619,746
1,444,677
936,942
847,521
653,438
1,039,609
5,316,620
22,940,721
1,163,232
3,760,308
0.14
0.37
0.35
0.52
0.58
0.21
0.08
0.07
1.89
0.30
1.31
0.07
0.11
0.07
0.07
0.14
0.05
0.16
0.09
0.05
0.17
0.02
0.02
0.20
0.05
0.03
0.06
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.07
0.02
0.01
0.07
0.03
337
996
129
4,379
456,581
872,620
107,828
4,017,779
1,353
876
838
918
9,285,097
2,401,951
3,136,053
635,675
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.14
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70958
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.3—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3119
3121
3122
3131
3132
3133
3141
3149
3151
3152
3159
3161
3162
3169
3211
3212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3219
3221
3222
3231
3241
3251
3252
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3253 ..................
3254 ..................
3255 ..................
3256 ..................
3259
3261
3262
3271
3272
3273
3274
3279
3311
3312
3313
3314
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3315
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3328 ..................
3329 ..................
3331 ..................
3332 ..................
3333 ..................
3334 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
3335 ..................
3336 ..................
3339
3341
3342
3343
3344
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3345 ..................
3346 ..................
3351 ..................
3352 ..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Other Food Manufacturing ..................................................
Beverage Manufacturing .....................................................
Tobacco Manufacturing .......................................................
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills .............................................
Fabric Mills ..........................................................................
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating Mills ........
Textile Furnishings Mills ......................................................
Other Textile Product Mills ..................................................
Apparel Knitting Mills ...........................................................
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing ..................................
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing .....
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing ............................
Footwear Manufacturing ......................................................
Other Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing ...............
Sawmills and Wood Preservation .......................................
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing.
Other Wood Product Manufacturing ...................................
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills .....................................
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing ............................
Printing and Related Support Activities ..............................
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing .....................
Basic Chemical Manufacturing ............................................
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing .....................
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing ......................
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing ...
Plastics Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Rubber Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing .......................
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing ............................
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing ...................
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing .........................
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing .............
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing .............
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased Steel ...........
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing ...........
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production and
Processing.
Foundries .............................................................................
Forging and Stamping .........................................................
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing ..................................
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing .............
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing .........
Hardware Manufacturing .....................................................
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing .............................
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and
Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities ....
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing ..................
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing ....................................
Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing.
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial
Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing ..............................
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment
Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing .............
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing ..........
Communications Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Manufacturing and Reproducing Magnetic and Optical
Media.
Electric Lighting Equipment Manufacturing .........................
Household Appliance Manufacturing ..................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00262
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
1,111
3,429
32
60
192
263
630
1,705
54
2,095
236
61
75
302
1,006
264
1,075,034
2,263,370
42,411
75,096
233,984
271,517
573,335
1,270,778
66,320
1,429,596
188,102
42,671
123,351
187,558
1,185,132
633,617
968
660
1,311
1,254
1,217
1,031
910
745
1,228
682
796
698
1,655
621
1,179
2,400
2,724,529
1,398,536
6,587,893
2,191,371
3,435,732
1,915,018
780,741
614,109
1,443,320
637,842
619,537
2,839,687
2,193,374
626,299
1,727,380
4,044,768
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.05
0.12
0.12
0.09
0.11
0.13
0.02
0.08
0.10
0.07
0.06
3,327
27
559
10,124
244
277
226
3,257,167
376,078
893,086
5,790,603
494,702
556,651
335,765
979
13,794
1,597
572
2,027
2,011
1,485
1,053,722
93,208,301
4,579,693
693,094
28,484,143
21,892,698
6,835,167
0.09
0.01
0.03
0.08
0.01
0.01
0.02
229
350,781
1,534
7,269,726
0.02
546
448
704
603,519
542,317
655,288
1,106
1,211
931
3,960,913
3,140,147
2,390,628
0.03
0.04
0.04
579
2,192
382
328
539
1,336
51
1,006
103
121
82
178
723,101
2,911,100
557,177
323,850
546,405
1,655,935
122,726
1,149,905
218,406
265,350
262,328
278,430
1,250
1,328
1,459
989
1,014
1,240
2,409
1,143
2,121
2,191
3,197
1,566
3,072,599
2,782,966
2,487,702
1,473,179
1,791,588
2,456,404
7,351,270
1,653,776
6,567,240
7,339,261
12,497,676
8,757,990
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
391
556
373
4,125
300
186
298
8,812
547,296
557,664
259,248
4,085,887
423,339
153,954
292,858
6,785,989
1,398
1,003
695
991
1,409
828
983
770
2,192,210
2,020,339
1,107,327
1,456,833
3,917,337
1,511,537
1,589,842
910,823
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.08
1,740
1,998
776
1,753,611
2,026,136
880,986
1,008
1,014
1,135
985,271
1,910,855
2,303,225
0.10
0.05
0.05
951
602
827,287
467,902
870
777
1,790,885
1,741,883
0.05
0.04
409
485,787
1,186
2,390,594
0.05
2,174
186
1,503,816
279,911
692
1,504
1,172,111
4,514,698
0.06
0.03
1,576
317
374
180
991
1,782,884
181,009
275,245
98,831
740,401
1,131
570
735
548
747
2,828,012
2,040,422
2,213,015
1,509,740
1,810,399
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
1,411
961,637
682
2,280,952
0.03
158
80,247
509
869,333
0.06
321
73
290,904
67,216
906
915
2,228,223
1,907,392
0.04
0.05
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70959
TABLE VIII.D.3—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3353
3359
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3369
3371
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3372
3379
3391
3399
4231
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4232 ..................
4233 ..................
4234 ..................
4235 ..................
4236 ..................
4237 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4238 ..................
4239
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4249
4251
4411
4412
4413
4441
4442
4451
4452
4453
4491
4492
4551
4552
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4561
4571
4572
4581
4582
4583
4591
4592
4593
4594
4595
4599
4811
4812
4821
4831
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4832
4841
4842
4851
4852
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing ....................................
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing ..............................................
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing ..................
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing .....................................
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing .....................
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing .................................
Ship and Boat Building ........................................................
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing .................
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen Cabinet
Manufacturing.
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing ............
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing .................
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing ................
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing ....................................
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers .....
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant
Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies
Merchant Wholesalers.
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic
Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers .......
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers ..............
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers ......
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers ........
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers ...........
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers ........
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers ................................
Automobile Dealers .............................................................
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers ...............................................
Automotive Parts, Accessories, and Tire Retailers ............
Building Material and Supplies Dealers ..............................
Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Retailers ........
Grocery and Convenience Retailers ...................................
Specialty Food Retailers .....................................................
Beer, Wine, and Liquor Retailers ........................................
Furniture and Home Furnishings Retailers .........................
Electronics and Appliance Retailers ...................................
Department Stores ..............................................................
Warehouse Clubs, Supercenters, and Other General Merchandise Retailers.
Health and Personal Care Retailers ...................................
Gasoline Stations ................................................................
Fuel Dealers ........................................................................
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Retailers ......................
Shoe Retailers .....................................................................
Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Retailers ...............
Sporting Goods, Hobby, and Musical Instrument Retailers
Book Retailers and News Dealers ......................................
Florists .................................................................................
Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Retailers ...................
Used Merchandise Retailers ...............................................
Other Miscellaneous Retailers ............................................
Scheduled Air Transportation ..............................................
Nonscheduled Air Transportation ........................................
Rail Transportation ..............................................................
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation ................................................
General Freight Trucking ....................................................
Specialized Freight Trucking ...............................................
Urban Transit Systems ........................................................
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation ...........................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00263
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
543
530
72
462
1,140
368
32
446
321
4,244
585,477
775,438
42,019
571,401
1,248,555
569,759
104,712
605,519
258,348
3,437,887
1,078
1,462
586
1,237
1,096
1,550
3,303
1,357
804
810
2,265,967
4,923,782
8,079,095
2,128,388
2,450,442
4,750,992
12,137,746
1,347,324
1,487,253
718,130
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.05
0.11
1,162
216
3,950
7,399
1,257
1,046,524
288,388
2,735,349
5,215,239
4,993,354
901
1,337
693
705
3,973
1,149,394
2,340,433
758,887
801,390
3,303,747
0.08
0.06
0.09
0.09
0.12
910
785
3,110,498
2,505,110
3,417
3,193
2,854,446
3,557,039
0.12
0.09
1,916
5,577,568
2,912
2,405,983
0.12
556
2,106,984
3,790
6,228,340
0.06
1,576
5,580,492
3,542
3,369,434
0.11
816
2,636,524
3,230
2,796,763
0.12
3,312
15,267,247
4,610
2,896,468
0.16
2,551
610
563
1,248
2,242
266
676
263
243
6,358,104
2,004,758
1,888,913
3,098,845
7,359,247
1,240,969
2,375,082
1,242,062
763,626
2,492
3,287
3,356
2,483
3,283
4,671
3,516
4,718
3,147
2,832,277
2,995,604
4,020,123
2,808,295
4,893,717
11,316,686
5,030,093
20,772,751
3,176,806
0.09
0.11
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.04
0.07
0.02
0.10
1,870
3,577
4,702
1,853
4,859
5,693
2,502
10,521
3,551
5,163
6,010
3,217
148
2,556
6,010,140
7,395,194
9,420,631
4,518,777
11,159,040
7,059,545
5,016,485
16,794,972
5,729,397
5,975,343
8,962,736
4,908,069
190,770
3,419,681
3,215
2,068
2,004
2,439
2,297
1,240
2,005
1,596
1,613
1,157
1,491
1,525
1,287
1,338
2,900,974
8,758,811
3,255,236
2,697,277
1,134,410
1,614,974
1,498,082
1,054,320
900,891
1,325,671
1,223,523
1,030,417
1,621,586
842,471
0.11
0.02
0.06
0.09
0.20
0.08
0.13
0.15
0.18
0.09
0.12
0.15
0.08
0.16
7,776
10,327
649
5,967
1,010
2,976
5,150
774
2,213
3,317
2,352
5,911
278
1,285
96
455
9,533,570
15,498,593
1,060,755
8,712,135
1,421,801
3,898,966
7,074,290
988,633
3,540,277
4,621,207
3,240,613
8,732,908
293,355
1,286,819
51,361
544,184
1,226
1,501
1,635
1,460
1,408
1,310
1,374
1,278
1,600
1,393
1,378
1,477
1,054
1,001
536
1,196
1,791,759
2,804,858
2,693,189
698,207
1,020,151
1,079,268
864,136
744,295
494,498
627,443
608,402
1,042,423
3,080,504
2,040,509
399,619
2,200,414
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.21
0.14
0.12
0.16
0.17
0.32
0.22
0.23
0.14
0.03
0.05
0.13
0.05
323
51,643
35,020
373
332
453,643
37,499,799
26,650,522
312,637
422,567
1,403
726
761
839
1,274
1,350,810
861,013
892,912
839,880
833,268
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.15
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70960
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.D.3—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
4853
4854
4855
4859
4861
4862
4869
4871
4872
4879
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4889
4921
4922
4931
5121
5122
5131
5132
5161
5162
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5171
5174
5178
5182
..................
..................
..................
..................
5192 ..................
5221
5222
5223
5231
..................
..................
..................
..................
5232
5239
5241
5242
..................
..................
..................
..................
5251
5259
5311
5312
5313
5321
5322
5323
5324
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5331 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
5411 ..................
5412 ..................
5413
5414
5415
5416
..................
..................
..................
..................
5417
5418
5419
5511
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5619
5621
5622
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Taxi and Limousine Service ................................................
School and Employee Bus Transportation .........................
Charter Bus Industry ...........................................................
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation ........
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil ...................................
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas ...............................
Other Pipeline Transportation .............................................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land ....................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water ..................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other ...................
Support Activities for Air Transportation .............................
Support Activities for Rail Transportation ...........................
Support Activities for Water Transportation ........................
Support Activities for Road Transportation .........................
Freight Transportation Arrangement ...................................
Other Support Activities for Transportation .........................
Couriers and Express Delivery Services ............................
Local Messengers and Local Delivery ................................
Warehousing and Storage ..................................................
Motion Picture and Video Industries ...................................
Sound Recording Industries ................................................
Newspaper, Periodical, Book, and Directory Publishers ....
Software Publishers ............................................................
Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations ......................
Media Streaming Distribution Services, Social Networks,
and Other Media Networks and Content Providers.
Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite)
Satellite Telecommunications ..............................................
All Other Telecommunications ............................................
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing,
Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and Other Information Services.
Depository Credit Intermediation .........................................
Nondepository Credit Intermediation ...................................
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation ..........................
Securities and Commodity Contracts Intermediation and
Brokerage.
Securities and Commodity Exchanges ...............................
Other Financial Investment Activities ..................................
Insurance Carriers ...............................................................
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds .............................
Other Investment Pools and Funds ....................................
Lessors of Real Estate ........................................................
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers ........................
Activities Related to Real Estate .........................................
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing ........................
Consumer Goods Rental .....................................................
General Rental Centers ......................................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment
Rental and Leasing.
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services .....................................................................
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll
Services.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services ..............
Specialized Design Services ...............................................
Computer Systems Design and Related Services ..............
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services .................
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services ..........
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services ......
Management of Companies and Enterprises .....................
Office Administrative Services ............................................
Facilities Support Services ..................................................
Employment Services ..........................................................
Business Support Services .................................................
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services ..................
Investigation and Security Services ....................................
Services to Buildings and Dwellings ...................................
Other Support Services .......................................................
Waste Collection .................................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ...........................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00264
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
5,931
1,444
663
3,097
27
59
29
474
1,385
208
2,961
315
1,396
8,222
11,283
1,202
3,125
2,990
3,555
2,383
445
1,936
1,057
370
235
6,596,898
1,578,496
764,143
2,381,262
34,499
90,847
37,586
570,363
2,109,958
272,900
3,481,748
430,553
1,914,888
6,121,945
15,674,157
1,095,829
2,811,195
2,455,403
3,599,514
4,673,631
780,716
4,503,697
2,023,518
1,470,235
560,991
1,112
1,093
1,152
769
1,282
1,528
1,288
1,203
1,524
1,311
1,176
1,366
1,372
745
1,389
912
900
821
1,012
1,962
1,754
2,326
1,915
3,969
2,388
473,725
381,438
976,121
514,988
5,687,521
15,269,599
4,867,763
670,486
589,761
812,572
1,058,641
1,603,240
1,256,551
687,092
1,583,872
799,155
843,986
741,162
1,301,304
903,851
660,025
816,692
1,268,517
662,207
1,346,479
0.23
0.29
0.12
0.15
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.18
0.26
0.16
0.11
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.08
0.22
0.27
0.28
0.15
0.60
0.18
942
40
287
1,112
1,900,994
86,847
502,736
2,196,650
2,018
2,157
1,753
1,976
1,249,302
1,745,466
1,126,736
1,171,961
0.16
0.12
0.16
0.17
468
867,704
1,853
507,510
0.37
637
1,654
1,718
1,349
1,709,643
3,919,691
3,212,716
2,298,865
2,682
2,369
1,870
1,704
1,711,700
1,191,143
758,941
1,235,568
0.16
0.20
0.25
0.14
0
6,852
499
17,366
19,633
11,878,438
1,011,256
34,184,872
39,745
1,734
2,025
1,968
753,808,884
1,247,480
3,600,269
575,155
0.01
0.14
0.06
0.34
197
112
12,961
14,379
10,077
482
1,039
284
949
166,858
200,679
26,616,095
25,261,103
22,407,861
1,447,641
3,003,692
865,973
2,282,588
849
1,786
2,054
1,757
2,224
3,004
2,891
3,049
2,404
198,788
1,085,641
1,090,656
700,221
584,901
1,018,247
609,218
969,539
1,447,107
0.43
0.16
0.19
0.25
0.38
0.29
0.47
0.31
0.17
285
476,238
1,669
3,054,162
0.05
22,852
14,754
45,807,442
29,735,652
2,005
2,015
747,237
425,212
0.27
0.47
11,568
4,322
15,074
21,484
42,680,149
10,844,535
30,869,789
48,439,074
3,690
2,509
2,048
2,255
796,165
651,156
699,158
605,529
0.46
0.39
0.29
0.37
1,662
4,240
8,042
622
3,518
157
2,522
2,939
1,846
2,305
24,202
2,194
893
140
4,503,806
11,597,282
31,055,715
1,694,619
5,423,804
441,128
4,435,122
3,932,901
2,452,247
7,402,537
62,022,534
4,403,819
1,162,660
316,092
2,709
2,735
3,862
2,724
1,542
2,817
1,758
1,338
1,328
3,212
2,563
2,007
1,301
2,251
1,184,901
972,915
718,191
2,000,475
785,494
1,344,810
862,254
637,724
1,145,290
568,222
441,221
960,942
1,262,504
1,725,940
0.23
0.28
0.54
0.14
0.20
0.21
0.20
0.21
0.12
0.57
0.58
0.21
0.10
0.13
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70961
TABLE VIII.D.3—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
5629
6111
6112
6113
6114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6115
6116
6117
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6219
6221
6222
6223
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
9993 ..................
Total ...........
..............................................................................................
6233 ..................
6239 ..................
6241 ..................
6242 ..................
6243
6244
7111
7112
7113
7114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7115
7121
7131
7132
7139
7211
7212
7213
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7223
7224
7225
8111
8112
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
8113 ..................
8114
8121
8122
8123
8129
8131
8132
8133
8134
8139
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Remediation and Other Waste Management Services ......
Elementary and Secondary Schools ...................................
Junior Colleges ....................................................................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools ...............
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools .............................................
Other Schools and Instruction .............................................
Educational Support Services .............................................
Offices of Physicians ...........................................................
Offices of Dentists ...............................................................
Offices of Other Health Practitioners ..................................
Outpatient Care Centers .....................................................
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories ..................................
Home Health Care Services ...............................................
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services .............................
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals .............................
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ......................
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities) .............
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability,
Mental Health, and Substance Abuse Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted
Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities ........................................
Individual and Family Services ...........................................
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency and Other
Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services ......................................
Child Care Services ............................................................
Performing Arts Companies ................................................
Spectator Sports ..................................................................
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers,
and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers .....................
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions ............
Amusement Parks and Arcades .........................................
Gambling Industries ............................................................
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries .....................
Traveler Accommodation ....................................................
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers’ Camps.
Special Food Services ........................................................
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) ...............................
Restaurants and Other Eating Places ................................
Automotive Repair and Maintenance ..................................
Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance.
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance
Personal Care Services ......................................................
Death Care Services ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Laundry Services .....................................
Other Personal Services .....................................................
Religious Organizations ......................................................
Grantmaking and Giving Services ......................................
Social Advocacy Organizations ...........................................
Civic and Social Organizations ...........................................
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and Similar Organizations.
Local Government ...............................................................
6231 ..................
6232 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Industry
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00265
Fmt 4701
Costs as %
of revenue
1,086
1,169
29
119
1,062
3,133,580
3,475,761
111,992
231,971
1,591,435
2,885
2,973
3,817
1,952
1,498
1,098,195
637,302
2,336,262
1,512,355
755,854
0.26
0.47
0.16
0.13
0.20
841
6,476
1,096
6,908
5,290
5,695
536
265
653
209
4
1
2
1,646,426
11,488,813
1,574,151
12,269,746
13,513,854
10,110,019
1,544,461
717,035
2,917,046
655,184
20,164
60,072
89,129
1,959
1,774
1,437
1,776
2,555
1,775
2,879
2,703
4,468
3,137
5,297
40,967
45,058
687,422
332,175
604,768
960,870
948,924
447,256
989,325
1,182,302
518,702
797,038
10,704,238
15,140,669
23,112,360
0.28
0.53
0.24
0.18
0.27
0.40
0.29
0.23
0.86
0.39
0.05
0.27
0.19
97
246
299,181
1,184,615
3,092
4,820
1,138,055
495,389
0.27
0.97
523
2,224,552
4,252
439,078
0.97
83
1,805
334
513,007
7,386,994
1,555,480
6,216
4,092
4,659
469,247
424,361
990,632
1.32
0.96
0.47
81
2,132
4,171
1,794
3,604
2,047
345,131
20,144,880
4,129,821
1,430,879
3,665,186
2,033,576
4,262
9,448
990
797
1,017
993
566,673
290,434
787,860
1,258,295
1,122,492
1,093,566
0.75
3.25
0.13
0.06
0.09
0.09
15,202
3,149
1,354
744
28,297
12,993
2,293
654
14,251,524
3,311,160
1,316,414
922,020
22,821,999
15,574,139
1,620,981
651,616
937
1,051
972
1,239
807
1,199
707
996
787,943
608,424
516,918
1,354,532
483,584
877,297
721,900
650,782
0.12
0.17
0.19
0.09
0.17
0.14
0.10
0.15
6,293
12,801
117,267
64,015
4,843
4,826,527
9,231,321
109,738,307
85,582,777
7,081,340
767
721
936
1,337
1,462
453,753
450,393
537,890
646,006
555,490
0.17
0.16
0.17
0.21
0.26
8,375
11,158,572
1,332
842,857
0.16
9,205
50,363
6,418
12,190
15,818
76,718
7,573
6,199
10,249
23,841
10,159,719
59,103,771
9,445,610
12,520,561
15,920,372
98,017,873
8,483,782
6,958,994
12,512,391
28,061,383
1,104
1,174
1,472
1,027
1,006
1,278
1,120
1,123
1,221
1,177
380,439
267,441
854,725
353,835
339,338
417,227
2,705,446
816,788
479,271
819,457
0.29
0.44
0.17
0.29
0.30
0.31
0.04
0.14
0.25
0.14
1,922
4,052,837
2,109
1,111,959
0.19
1,847,745
2,177,399,776
1,178
987,455
0.12
Source: OSHA estimate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Average
revenue per
entity
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70962
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
classification code 531—Exposure to
Environmental Heat.
E. Benefits
I. Introduction
OSHA’s proposed standard for Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings is a crucial
step towards ensuring the health, safety,
and well-being of employees with
occupational exposure to hazardous
heat. Compliance with this standard is
projected to yield substantial health and
safety benefits, primarily through the
reduction of occupational non-fatal
heat-related injuries and illnesses (HRIs)
and heat-related fatalities. These
include severe conditions such as heat
stroke, which can be fatal if not
promptly treated, and heat exhaustion,
which can lead to more serious
complications if ignored. To estimate
the health and safety benefits of this
standard, OSHA has conducted an
analysis of data on workplace incidents
involving exposure to heat. In this
section, OSHA will first present the
available BLS data on HRIs and heatrelated fatalities. After that, there is a
discussion of underreporting issues
surrounding these data which leads to a
presentation of OSHA’s underreporting
adjusted count of HRIs and heat-related
fatalities. Even with this adjustment,
there remains a great deal of uncertainty
surrounding the extent of
underreporting, other parameters used
in this estimation of health and safety
benefits, as well as additional potential
benefits, all of which the agency
discusses next in an uncertainty
analysis. Finally, this section includes a
sensitivity analysis that calculates the
potential benefits of this standard
assuming different parameters to
demonstrate the range of potential
quantifiable benefits.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
II. Fatal and Non-Fatal Heat-Related
Injuries and Illnesses
OSHA estimated the potential benefits
of the proposed standard by
determining the number of HRIs and
heat-related fatalities that could be
prevented through its provisions. This
estimation was based on data regarding
occupational fatalities and HRIs
resulting from exposure to
environmental heat. OSHA conducted
this analysis using data from the BLS
Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities (IIF)
program. The IIF program collects data
annually through two major surveys: the
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries
(CFOI) and the Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (SOII). OSHA
identified the number of heat-related
fatalities and HRIs by searching BLS’
CFOI and SOII databases for incidents
captured under BLS event or exposure
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Heat-Related Fatalities
The CFOI, a Federal/State cooperative
program, aims to provide accurate,
comprehensive, and timely information
on occupational fatalities. According to
the CFOI data, between 1992 and 2022,
there were 1,042 fatal cases due to
employee exposure to environmental
heat (BLS, 2024c). As depicted in table
VIII.E.1., while the annual number of
heat-related fatalities has fluctuated
over this 31-year period, a gradual
increasing trend in the annual average is
evident.
TABLE VIII.E.1—OCCUPATIONAL FATALITIES: EXPOSURE TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEAT, ALL OWNERSHIPS,
U.S.
[1992–2022]
Number of
fatalities
Year
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
12
22
28
35
18
22
34
35
21
24
40
29
18
47
44
32
27
35
40
61
31
34
18
37
39
32
49
43
56
36
43
Total Fatalities ...............
1,042
Source: BLS, 2024c.
To assess recent trends, OSHA
focused its analysis on heat-related
fatalities between 2011 and 2022. Over
this 12-year timeframe, BLS CFOI data
reported a total of 479 work-related
fatalities from exposure to
environmental heat, an average of 40
fatalities per year. OSHA also evaluated
the fatality counts by industry. Due to
BLS publication guidelines, some
PO 00000
Frm 00266
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
industry-level estimates were not
publishable, denoted by dashes in the
BLS tables. OSHA used the BLS data to
estimate the number of fatalities by
industry for those cases. OSHA used
four steps to estimate the number of
industry fatalities in years with
undisclosed BLS data.
First, OSHA reviewed the total annual
number of heat-related fatalities in all
industries, comparing this total to the
sum of annual total fatalities in private
industry and government. In all cases
where the sum of the fatalities in the
two categories did not match the total
annual fatalities, one of the categories
had an undisclosed annual fatality
count. Therefore, OSHA assumed that
the fatality count for the undisclosed
estimate was equal to the difference
between total annual fatalities and the
fatalities in the published estimate (total
for private industry or government). For
example, in 2020, the total number of
fatalities in all industries was 56, the
total number of fatalities in private
industry was 52, and the total in
government was undisclosed. OSHA
estimated that the number of heatrelated fatalities in government was
equal to the difference, four.
Second, OSHA reviewed the total
heat-related deaths in all private
industry and compared to the sum of
heat-related fatalities in private goodsproducing industries and private
service-producing industries combined.
Since these two groups cover all private
industry, the numbers are expected to
be equal. In 2019–2022, the data for
both categories (goods-producing and
service-providing) was undisclosed.
OSHA estimated the number of fatalities
for both categories for 2019–2022. Using
the data from 2011–2018, OSHA
divided the average percentage of heatrelated private industry fatalities that
were attributable to each group,
estimating that 63 percent of private
industry fatalities were in goodsproducing industries and the remaining
37 percent were in service-producing
industries. In each of the four years with
undisclosed data, OSHA estimated the
total fatalities in goods-producing and
service-providing industries by
multiplying each percentage by the total
number of private industry annual heatrelated fatalities. For example, in 2019,
OSHA estimates that 63 percent of the
private industry fatalities, 25.3 fatalities,
are in goods-producing industries.
Next, OSHA reviewed the supersectors within private goods-producing
and private service-providing
industries, comparing the total annual
fatalities in each category to the sum of
the annual fatalities of the lower, more
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
detailed underlying super-sectors.93 In
years where the comparison showed a
mismatch due to undisclosed data,
OSHA estimated the data for the
undisclosed super-sectors by
distributing the difference between the
total annual fatalities and the sum of
fatalities in the underlying super-sectors
across the super-sectors with
undisclosed data. More specifically, the
estimate for these undisclosed supersectors was set equal to the difference
described above multiplied by the
percentage of non-fatal heat-related
incidents 94 by super-sector. This
percentage is calculated by the estimate
of average annual heat-related non-fatal
injuries and illnesses within the supersector divided by the average total
number of heat-related incidents in the
category in which it belongs (i.e., goodsproducing or service-providing).
Finally, OSHA examined the annual
fatality counts for government and used
a different method to estimate fatalities
due to the differences in scope between
SOII and CFOI.95 For each year, OSHA
calculated the difference between the
total annual heat-related fatalities in
government and the sum of annual
fatality counts by all government
ownership types (Federal, State, and
local). OSHA assumed this difference
represents the number of fatalities for
ownership types with undisclosed
yearly estimates. OSHA evenly
distributed the difference across all
government ownerships with
undisclosed estimates for that year. For
example, in 2020 there were four total
heat-related fatalities in all government.
Since none of the government
ownership types had disclosed
estimates, OSHA estimated that local,
State, and Federal Government had 1.3
(4/3) fatalities each. Table VIII.E.2.
presents the total estimated fatality
counts for 2011 to 2022 by industry
groups.
Further analysis of the data revealed
that an estimated 88.1 percent or 422 of
these fatalities occurred within private
industry, while 11.9 percent or 57
fatalities were recorded in Federal,
State, and local governments. Within
the private industry, the Goods
Producing industries accounted for 262
of these estimated fatalities, with
70963
Construction accounting for 162 of the
incidents within that sector. Natural
Resources and Mining (which includes
agriculture) and Manufacturing
accounted for 52 and 49 of the estimated
fatalities within the Goods-Producing
industries respectively. Additionally,
160 of the 422 fatalities in private
industry occurred in the ServiceProviding industries, which includes
super-sectors such as Trade,
Transportation and Utilities, Leisure
and Hospitality, and Professional and
Business Services. Professional and
Business Services (this NAICS supersector can include disparate
occupations, including janitors, material
movers, groundskeeping workers, office
clerks, security guards, architects,
accountants, engineers, general
managers, waste collectors, and lawyers)
made up nearly 45 percent of all
fatalities within the Service Providing
industries, accounting for 71 of the 160
fatalities within this group. These
findings are detailed below in table
VIII.E.2., illustrating the distribution of
fatalities across different sectors and
industries.
TABLE VIII.E.2—ESTIMATED OCCUPATIONAL FATALITIES BY INDUSTRY: EXPOSURE TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEAT, NUMBER
AND PERCENT, ALL OWNERSHIPS, U.S.
[2011–2022]
Estimated total
number of
fatalities
Industry
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Total Injuries Fatalities .....................................................................................................................
Private Industry a ..............................................................................................................................
Goods Producing Industries b c ........................................................................................................
Natural Resources and Mining ........................................................................................................
Construction .....................................................................................................................................
Manufacturing ..................................................................................................................................
Service Providing Industries b c ........................................................................................................
Trade, Transportation and Utilities ..................................................................................................
Information .......................................................................................................................................
Financial Activities ...........................................................................................................................
Professional and Business Services ...............................................................................................
Education and Health Services .......................................................................................................
Leisure and Hospitality ....................................................................................................................
Other Services .................................................................................................................................
Government a d .................................................................................................................................
Federal Government .................................................................................................................
State Government ....................................................................................................................
Local Government ....................................................................................................................
Percent of total
fatalities
479
422
262
52
162
49
160
45
7
5
71
7
15
10
57
26
10
21
....................................
88.1
54.8
10.8
33.7
10.3
33.3
9.4
1.4
1.0
14.8
1.4
3.2
2.0
11.9
5.5
2.1
4.3
Source: OSHA derived estimates based on BLS, 2024c.
a OSHA estimated years with undisclosed data using the difference between total annual fatalities and the sum of private industry and government fatalities.
b OSHA estimated years with undisclosed estimates for goods-producing industry totals and service-providing industry totals by comparing the
annual sum of both categories to the total annual private industry fatalities and adjusting for the average percentage of private industries that fall
within each category.
c For years with undisclosed data in the underlying super-sectors within these categories, OSHA estimated the number of fatalities by multiplying the number of fatalities unaccounted for in the published data by a ratio of the non-fatal heat-related injuries and illnesses for the supersector.
93 The underlying super-sectors of GoodsProducing Industries are Natural Resources and
Mining (includes agriculture), Construction, and
Manufacturing. The underlying super-sectors
within Service-Providing industries are Trade,
Transportation, and Utilities; Information; Financial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Activities; Professional and Business Services;
Education and Health Services; Leisure and
Hospitality; and Other Services.
94 The percentage of total domain-level non-fatal
heat-related incidents by super-sector was
PO 00000
Frm 00267
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
calculated using the SOII data from 2011–2022,
described in more detail in section VIII.E.II.B.,
below.
95 SOII excludes Federal Government ownership
and CFOI does not.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70964
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
d Estimates for the three different government ownership codes with annual undisclosed data were estimated by distributing the residual between the total annual government fatalities and the sum of published fatalities at the more detailed government ownership level, evenly across
all government ownership types with undisclosed estimates.
From 2011 to 2022, SOII recorded a total
of 39,450 HRIs that required days away
from work, averaging 3,288 HRIs per
year (BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2023g; and BLS,
2023h). As detailed in table VIII.E.3.,
35.8 percent of these HRIs required only
one day away from work to recover after
B. Non-Fatal Heat-Related Injuries and
Illnesses (HRIs)
The BLS SOII is a Federal/State
cooperative program that publishes
estimates on non-fatal occupational
injuries and illnesses, including HRIs.
the incident, 21.5 percent required two
days, and 23.9 percent needed three to
five days. The remaining 18.8 percent of
cases needed six or more days away
from work for recovery from injuries
and illnesses caused by exposure to
environmental heat.
TABLE VIII.E.3—NON-FATAL OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES REQUIRING DAYS AWAY FROM WORK: EXPOSURE
TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEAT, NUMBER AND PERCENT, ALL OWNERSHIPS, U.S.
[2011–2022]
Number of
non-fatal injuries
and illnesses
Total Non-Fatal Injuries and Illnesses .............................................................................................
Number of days away from work:
Cases involving 1 day ..............................................................................................................
Cases involving 2 days ............................................................................................................
Cases involving 3–5 days ........................................................................................................
Cases involving 6–10 days ......................................................................................................
Cases involving 11–20 days ....................................................................................................
Cases involving 21–30 days ....................................................................................................
Cases involving 31 or more days .............................................................................................
Median days away from work a .......................................................................................................
Percent of total
non-fatal injuries
and illnesses
39,450
....................................
14,130
8,500
9,440
3,660
1,760
480
1,500
2
35.8
21.5
23.9
9.3
4.5
1.2
3.8
....................................
Source: OSHA calculations based on BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2023g; and BLS, 2023h.
Note: Because of rounding and data exclusion of nonclassifiable responses, data may not sum to the totals. Days away from work include
those that result in days away from work with or without job transfer or restriction.
a Median days away from work is the measure used to summarize the varying lengths of absences from work among the cases with days
away from work. Half the cases involved more days and half involved less days than a specified median. Median days away from work are represented in actual values.
Table VIII.E.4. details the BLS’ SOII
estimates of annual incidence rates of
HRIs between 2011 and 2022. Over this
period, the average estimated annual
incidence rate is 3 cases per 100,000
full-time workers for HRIs. This
incidence rate indicates the annual
frequency of injuries and illnesses due
to heat exposure.
TABLE VIII.E.4—NON-FATAL OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES OR ILLNESSES: EXPOSURE TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEAT, NUMBER AND
ANNUAL INCIDENCE RATES PER 100,000 WORKERS, ALL OWNERSHIPS, U.S.
[2011–2022]
Number of
non-fatal injuries
or illnesses
Year
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Incidence rate
per 100,000
full-time workers
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................
& 2022 ....................................................................................................................................
4,420
4,170
3,160
2,660
2,830
4,110
3,180
3,950
3,080
2,330
5,560
4
4
3
2
3
4
3
3
3
2
2
Total Non-Fatal Injuries and Illnesses, All Ownerships ...........................................................
Average Non-Fatal Injuries and Illnesses Per Year .................................................................
39,450
3,288
....................................
3
Source: BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2023g; and BLS, 2023h.
Note: Starting with 2021, BLS published data biennially. The number of HRIs reported for 2021 and 2022, is a biennial estimate.
Table VIII.E.5. presents the number of
HRIs by industry from 2011 to 2022.
Similar to the findings illustrated in
table VIII.E.2., table VIII.E.5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
demonstrates that the majority of HRIs
also occur predominantly within private
industry, accounting for 79.9 percent or
31,510 of the 39,450 non-fatal injuries
PO 00000
Frm 00268
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and illnesses. Twenty-one percent of
HRIs occurred within State and local
governments, accounting for 7,930 of all
HRIs. Within private industry, more
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
than half of all recorded HRIs occurred
in the Service Providing sector, which
accounted for 18,460 of the total 31,510
HRIs recorded. The Trade,
Transportation, and Utilities industry
(which includes Wholesale Trade, Retail
Trade, Transportation and Warehousing,
and Utilities) made up 8,010 of HRIs
within the Service Providing sector,
followed by Professional and Business
Services, and Leisure and Hospitality
with 4,260, and 1,790 HRIs,
respectively. The Goods Producing
sector accounted for 13,050 of the total
70965
HRIs within private industry, most of
which occurred within the Construction
and Manufacturing industries, with
6,130 and 5,100 non-fatal cases
respectively.
TABLE VIII.E.5—NON-FATAL OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES BY INDUSTRY: EXPOSURE TO ENVIRONMENTAL
HEAT, NUMBER AND PERCENT, ALL OWNERSHIPS, U.S.
[2011–2022]
Number of
injuries
and illnesses
Industry
Percent of total
injuries and
illnesses
Total Injuries and Illnesses ..............................................................................................................
39,450
....................................
Private Industry ................................................................................................................................
31,510
79.9
Goods Producing Industries ............................................................................................................
13,050
33.1
Natural Resources and Mining ........................................................................................................
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting ......................................................................................
Mining ..............................................................................................................................................
Construction .....................................................................................................................................
Manufacturing ..................................................................................................................................
1,790
1,200
580
6,130
5,100
4.5
3.0
1.5
15.5
12.9
Service Providing Industries ............................................................................................................
18,460
46.8
Trade, Transportation and Utilities ..................................................................................................
Wholesale Trade ..............................................................................................................................
Retail Trade .....................................................................................................................................
Transportation and Warehousing ....................................................................................................
Utilities .............................................................................................................................................
Information .......................................................................................................................................
Financial Activities ...........................................................................................................................
Finance and Insurance ....................................................................................................................
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing ..............................................................................................
Professional and Business Services ...............................................................................................
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services .............................................................................
Management of Companies and Enterprises ..................................................................................
Administrative and support and waste management and remediation services ............................
Education and Health Services .......................................................................................................
Educational Services .......................................................................................................................
Healthcare and Social Assistance ...................................................................................................
Leisure and Hospitality ....................................................................................................................
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation ...............................................................................................
Accommodation and Food Services ................................................................................................
Other Services .................................................................................................................................
Other Services, Except Public Administration .................................................................................
Public Administration .......................................................................................................................
8,010
1,570
2,200
3,900
330
1,140
810
....................................
680
4,260
120
60
3,520
1,140
110
1,000
1,790
540
1,230
1,250
1,250
....................................
20.3
4.0
5.6
9.9
0.8
2.9
2.1
....................................
1.7
10.8
0.3
0.2
8.9
2.9
0.3
2.5
4.5
1.4
3.1
3.2
3.2
....................................
State Government ............................................................................................................................
Local Government ...........................................................................................................................
1,490
6,440
3.8
16.3
Source: OSHA calculation from BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2023g; and BLS, 2023h.
Note: Because of rounding and data exclusion for detailed categories that did not meet the BLS publication guidelines, data may not sum to
the totals. The SOII excludes all work-related fatalities as well as non-fatal work injuries and illnesses to the self-employed, to workers on farms
with 10 or fewer employees, to private household workers; to volunteers, and to Federal Government workers.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Underreporting
Based on an analysis of relevant
academic literature (discussed in detail
in Section V.A., Risk Assessment),
OSHA has determined that heat-related
occupational fatalities and HRIs are
underreported due to (1) employers not
being fully compliant with
recordkeeping rules, (2) employees not
reporting cases to their employers, (3) a
lack of identifying heat as the cause of
a heat-related injury or illness, and (4)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the scope and inclusion criteria of the
various surveillance data.
I. Underreporting of Heat-Related
Fatalities
BLS CFOI is well-regarded as the most
complete and authoritative source on
fatal workplace injuries and estimates of
its magnitude of underreporting of
occupational fatalities do not exist.
However, there may be factors specific
to heat-related fatalities that make CFOI
PO 00000
Frm 00269
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
particularly likely to misclassify the
cause of death as being due to some
other cause. This could mean that heatrelated fatalities may be historically
excluded from CFOI (e.g., cause of death
is listed as cardiac arrest) or listed under
another, not heat-specific Occupational
Injury and Illness Classification System
(OIICS) category (e.g., a worker faints
due to heat exposure, falls from a
height, and subsequently suffers a fatal
traumatic injury). Additionally, as
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70966
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
discussed in Section V.A., Risk
Assessment, the documentation upon
which BLS relies to code occupational
fatalities (e.g., death certificates, coroner
reports) may have limitations for heatrelated fatalities due to the lack of
expertise or experience of the individual
determining the cause of death and
whether the individual witnessed the
events preceding the fatality. Therefore,
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that there is reason to believe that the
number of heat-related fatalities in CFOI
are undercounted, but precise estimates
of this quantification do not exist.
II. OSHA’s Underreporting
Adjustment—Heat-Related Fatalities
Heat-related fatalities are often
identified in public health surveillance
through review of International
Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes
listed in death certificates, which are
known to be limited in their capture of
heat as a cause-of-death (Shen et al.,
1998). However, epidemiologists have
increasingly used statistical techniques
to identify excess deaths attributable to
heat, both globally and in the United
States, regardless of the cause-of-death
listed on the death certificate. A recent
study from 2020 estimated that, on
average, 5,608 excess deaths were the
result of heat each year between 1997
and 2006 in the 297 counties examined
(representing approximately 62 percent
of the U.S. population) or 9,045 excess
deaths per year when extrapolated to
the full nation (Weinberger et al., 2020).
Estimates for similar time periods using
the death certificate approach ranged
from 618 to 658 heat-related deaths per
year across the U.S. (Xu, 2012; Fowler
et al., 2013). This would suggest that
nationally heat-related deaths may be
13.7-to-14.6 fold undercounted.
However, it is unclear if this ratio could
be applied to CFOI estimates of
occupational heat-related fatalities, as it
is not clear what proportion of these
excess deaths occurred among workers.
Recent evidence from Mexico indicates
that heat-related excess deaths are
concentrated among working-age
individuals and children (preprint by
Wilson et al., 2024). If the same pattern
holds in the U.S., then the
undercounting estimates above (13.7–
14.6) might be understating the
magnitude of the undercount for
workers. However, another recent study
that examined heat-related excess
deaths in Europe found that these
deaths were predominantly
concentrated among individuals over
the age of 65 (Ballester et al., 2023). If
this pattern were true for the U.S., the
undercounting estimates above might be
overstating the magnitude of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
undercounting for workers. These two
studies had important differences in
methodology (e.g., use of exposure
metric, use of observational weather
data, and age groups analyzed) and
underlying population (e.g., age
distribution), and the researchers were
not able to characterize work-related
deaths. Given that the proportion of
work-related deaths among the total
estimated excess heat-related deaths in
the U.S. is unknown, OSHA did not
adjust the ratio derived from comparing
Weinberger et al.’s estimates to Xu and
Fowler et al.’s counts. Therefore, for this
analysis, OSHA estimates that
occupational fatalities due to heat are
undercounted by a factor of 14.
Additional values of the undercount—
both higher and lower—are presented
later in this section in a sensitivity
analysis. OSHA welcomes comment on
the estimates of avoided fatalities, the
underreporting adjustment, data
sources, and methodologies employed
here. The agency welcomes additional
studies that OSHA should consider and
comment on whether there are more
appropriate underreporting factors that
should be used to adjust reported
fatalities in the final economic analysis.
III. Underreporting of Non-Fatal HRIs
As discussed in Section V.A., Risk
Assessment, researchers and
government agencies have long
acknowledged the shortcomings of
BLS’s SOII in accurately estimating all
non-fatal occupational injuries and
illnesses. One limitation is the scope of
cases for which BLS has historically
reported enough information to identify
HRIs—only those cases involving days
away from work.96 Another limitation of
SOII is the reliance on employerreported data, as research has
demonstrated that employers are not
always fully compliant with
recordkeeping rules. Quantifying the
magnitude of the undercounting of SOII
is difficult, but comparisons to workers’
compensation and other databases
provide some context for the potential
magnitude of undercounting.
IV. OSHA’s Underreporting
Adjustment—Non-Fatal HRIs
The best available estimates of the
magnitude of the underreporting of
injuries and illnesses comes from a 2014
study funded by BLS that compared
State-based surveillance data from
California (specifically the Workers’
96 BLS expanded their publication of case and
demographic data for injury and illness cases
involving days of job transfer or restriction (DJTR)
with the introduction of biennial estimates in 2021–
2022. (https://www.bls.gov/iif/notices/2022/
biennial-estimates.htm).
PO 00000
Frm 00270
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Compensation Information System, data
from healthcare facilities across the
State, and Doctors’ First Reports of
Occupational Illness or Injury) to BLS
SOII microdata for both carpal tunnel
syndrome and amputations from 2007–
2008 (Joe et al., 2014). In this study,
researchers linked individual cases in
each dataset to the corresponding case
in other datasets to obtain a better
estimate of the total number of cases for
each outcome occurring in California
during this time. They found that the
State-based data sources contained 5
times more amputations and 10 times
more carpal tunnel syndrome cases than
were reported in the BLS SOII data. Joe
et al. (2014) also found that about 30
percent of SOII cases were not captured
in the State database which suggests
that both sources are failing to capture
some injuries.
While Joe et al. (2014) was not
specific to heat, a more recent study
from California compared the number of
HRI claims in the State’s Workers’
Compensation Information System to
the estimated number of HRIs reported
in BLS SOII for the same years (2009–
2017) (Heinzerling et al., 2020).
Heinzerling et al. found 3–6 times the
number of HRI cases estimated by SOII
in the State’s workers’ compensation
database each year. While this study did
not match individual cases as was done
in Joe et al. (2014), it is reasonable to
assume that similar to the findings in
that study, some HRIs that were
captured by the SOII data were not
captured by the State’s workers’
compensation data. This would mean
that there are even more cases in the
State database that are not captured in
SOII (which would mean the
undercount estimate of 3–6 times is an
underestimate). It is also possible that
the workers’ compensation database
examined by Heinzerling et al. (2020) is
missing HRIs. In Joe et al., 2014,
approximately 54–74 percent of cases
identified in the healthcare facility data
were only found in that dataset and 46
percent of cases identified in the
Doctors’ First Reports data were found
only in that dataset. This suggests that
the number of cases Heinzerling et al.
(2020) identified in the workers’
compensation data that they compared
to BLS SOII may itself have been an
undercount.
Finally, simply comparing the total
number of recorded occupational
fatalities annually to the total number of
annual recorded non-fatal injuries and
illnesses suggests potentially significant
underreporting of HRIs. For each
occupational death in 2022, there were
about 965 medically consulted workrelated injuries (4,695 fatalities to
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4,530,000 medically consulted injuries
based on data from the National Safety
Council (NSC, n.d.)). In 2022, for each
occupational fatality, there were about
639 recordable injuries and illnesses
(5,486 fatalities to 3.5046 million
recordable cases (BLS, 2024c; BLS,
2023b)). This ratio is generally
consistent across a number of specific
causes or types of occupational fatalities
and non-fatal injuries and illnesses.
Similarly, for heat-specific cases, a ratio
of 1,000 emergency department visits
and hospitalizations per 1.4 fatalities
was reported in a 2011 analysis by the
Florida Department of Health (Florida
DOH, 2011; also discussed in Section
V.A., Risk Assessment). As such, the
ratio of heat-related fatalities to HRIs
(about 82 HRIs for every one fatality)
from the data that OSHA is relying on
for its estimate of benefits indicates an
unusually low number of HRIs. Based
on the reported number of occupational
heat-related fatalities (which OSHA
believes, and research supports, is an
underestimate) of 40 per year, the
expected number of HRIs would be
around 38,000 per year versus the 3,288
reported annual HRIs (assuming the
relationship between fatalities and nonfatal injuries and illnesses is similar for
heat-related fatalities and injuries and
illnesses and the all-cause mortality and
injury and illness numbers).
Based on these studies, OSHA has
preliminary determined that the range
of estimates reported in Joe et al. (2014)
(i.e., 5–10 times more cases than in the
SOII data) are the best available
estimates on the magnitude of
undercounting of occupational injuries
and illnesses by BLS SOII. These values
are supported by Heinzerling et al.
(2020) which found 3–6 times the
number of HRI cases but which had
limitations likely leading to an
underestimation of the magnitude.
OSHA welcomes comment on this
adjustment, submission of additional
data or studies that would help the
agency refine this estimate, and
suggestions on alternative
methodologies.
V. Underreporting-Adjusted HRIs and
Heat-Related Fatalities
Based on this analysis, OSHA
estimates that HRIs are undercounted by
a factor of 7.5 (mid-point of 5 and 10)
and heat-related fatalities are
undercounted by a factor of 14.
Applying these factors to BLS’ reported
39,450 HRIs and 479 fatalities, OSHA
estimates an underreporting adjusted
total of 295,875 HRIs and a total of 6,706
heat-related fatalities from 2011 to 2022,
an annual average of 24,656 and 559 per
year respectively. Additional values of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
70967
the undercount—both higher and
lower—are presented later in this
section in a sensitivity analysis.
year. Total benefits each year for
avoided heat-related fatalities and HRIs
are $9.179 billion.
III. Monetized Health and Safety
Benefits
As explained in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, OSHA has preliminarily
determined, based on a review of
academic literature on the effectiveness
of heat injury and illness prevention
methods, that full compliance with this
proposed standard would reduce heatrelated fatalities by 99.8–100 percent
and HRIs by 37–96 percent. For this
benefits analysis, OSHA is assuming an
effectiveness of 95 percent for fatalities
and 65 percent of HRIs. The effect of
different assumptions on the outcome of
this benefits analysis are discussed
below in the sensitivity analysis.
Applying the undercount adjustment
to BLS-reported heat-related fatalities
and HRIs discussed above by factors of
14 and 7.5 respectively, OSHA estimates
that the proposed standard will prevent
531 heat-related fatalities per year (of
the estimated 559 fatalities) and 16,027
HRIs per year (of the estimated 24,656
HRIs) under the assumptions of 95
percent effectiveness for heat-related
fatalities and 65 percent effectiveness
for HRIs.97 Using the 2022 estimate of
the value of a statistical life (VSL)
developed by the Department of
Transportation (DOT) 98 and converting
to 2023 dollars using the GDP deflator
(BEA, 2024), $13.77 million, OSHA
estimates the monetized benefits from
avoided fatal heat-related incidents in
the first year would be $7.310 billion.
OSHA monetized benefits of avoided
HRIs using the midpoint of the range of
the value of a statistical injury (VSI)
cited in Viscusi and Gentry (2015),
converted to 2023 dollars using the GDP
deflator, $116,588 per injury.99 The
estimated monetized benefits from
avoided HRIs are $1.869 billion per
IV. Additional Unquantified Potential
Benefits
OSHA believes the proposed standard
may provide several additional potential
benefits beyond the avoided direct heatrelated fatalities and HRIs captured in
the monetized health and safety
benefits. These potential benefits
include avoided indirect fatal and nonfatal injuries related to heat exposure,
increased labor supply, and increased
utility for employees. The agency’s
estimate of monetized health and safety
benefits has not incorporated benefits
for these factors. The values presented
here are shown to demonstrate the
potential magnitude of these benefits
but are highly uncertain and, therefore,
not incorporated into the main
quantified estimate of the benefits of
this proposed standard.
97 OSHA assumes that the proposed standard is
equally effective at preventing fatalities and HRIs
that are currently reported in the economic data and
those that are currently unreported. The agency
welcomes comment on this assumption.
98 Available at https://www.transportation.gov/
office-policy/transportation-policy/reviseddepartmental-guidance-on-valuation-of-astatistical-life-in-economic-analysis (DOT, 2024).
The 2022 estimate was based on a comprehensive
2021 Department of Transportation guidance
update, available at https://www.transportation.gov/
sites/dot.gov/files/2021-03/DOT%20VSL%20
Guidance%20-%202021%20Update.pdf (DOT,
2021).
99 OSHA welcomes comment regarding this VSI
estimate and whether it is an appropriate value
given that HRIs may be less severe than other
injuries and illnesses typically considered in the
VSI derivation. The agency welcomes suggestions
on alternative VSI estimates for HRIs as well as
supporting data, methodologies, or studies that
would help the agency refine this estimate.
PO 00000
Frm 00271
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
A. Indirect Fatalities and Non-Fatal
Injuries
As discussed in detail in Section V.A.,
Risk Assessment, and Section IV.,
Health Effects, workers face additional
risks from working in hot environments
other than the direct physical effects of
heat on the employee’s body. Indirect
injuries that are caused by the
physiological effects of heat stress, but
are not themselves, heat exhaustion or
heat stroke (i.e., falling, motor vehicle
accidents, etc.). Direct HRIs and
fatalities are those caused by the effects
of heat on the body without the
involvement of other factors. The
underreporting adjustments in the
benefits analysis may not capture or
only capture some of the underreporting
of indirect HRIs and heat-related
fatalities. Researchers have used the
natural fluctuations in temperatures to
conduct quasi-experimental studies
examining the relationship between
heat and workers’ compensation claims
for traumatic injuries (Spector et al.,
2016; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender,
2019; Park et al., 2021; Negrusa et al.,
2024). These papers’ findings suggest
that there may be many workers’
compensation claims that are heatrelated but not coded as such. For
instance, Park et al. (2021) estimated
that approximately 20,000 injuries per
year in California between 2001 and
2018 were caused by hotter
temperatures (relative to ‘‘optimal’’
temperature). For comparison, for a
similar time period (2000–2017),
Heinzerling et al. (2020) only identified
an average of 889 HRI workers’
compensation claims per year in
California (a 22-fold difference),
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70968
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
suggesting that relying on workers’
compensation claims for HRIs alone
does not capture the higher incidence of
injuries of other kinds where heat may
have played a role. OSHA has not
included a quantified value of
potentially avoided indirect heat-related
fatalities and non-fatal occupational
injuries, but these studies suggest that
heat may contribute to additional
impacts on employees and that these
impacts may be significant. Because of
this, the benefits of this proposed
standard may be greater than what
OSHA estimates in the primary
estimate.
If the relationship between directlyand indirectly-caused heat-related nonfatal injuries found in Park et al. (2021)
was representative of the true
relationship, the number of
occupational direct and indirect heatrelated non-fatal injuries may be as high
as 72,000 annually (based on the BLSreported annual non-fatal injuries of
3,288 and an estimate of 22 indirect
heat-related injuries per 1 direct heatrelated injury). Assuming the proposed
standard prevented 65 percent of these
indirect non-fatal injuries, it might
prevent a total of 47,000 indirect nonfatal injuries each year. Monetizing
those avoided injuries would represent
about an additional $5.5 billion in
benefits (using a VSI of $116,588 per
avoided injury). If the relationship
between non-fatal injuries and fatalities
seen for occupational injuries and
fatalities in general of one fatality for
every 1,000 injuries holds for these
accidents, this means that there might
be 72 indirect heat-related fatalities
annually.100 Given that these are caused
by different factors besides heat and so
may be preventable at lower rates than
direct heat-related fatalities, assuming
preventability equal to the
preventability of non-fatal injuries, this
proposed standard might prevent an
additional 46 indirect heat-related
fatalities annually. Monetized, this
would mean additional benefits of $644
million.
B. Worker Disutility and Decreased
Labor Supply
There is a lengthy economic literature
that suggests that humans have strong
preferences for not being exposed to
extreme temperatures. Roback (1982)
100 This calculation uses a more generalized ratio
of occupational injuries to fatalities than those
discussed previously based on NSC and BLS data
(NSC, n.d.; BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2024c). If the NSCderived ratio of 965 injuries to one fatality were
more accurate, there could be about 75 indirect
heat-related fatalities annually. If the BLS-derived
ratio of 639 injuries to one fatality were correct, the
indirect heat-related fatalities could be around 113
annually.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
and Sinha et al. (2018) used revealed
preference techniques and found that
most people experience non-trivial
direct disutility 101 from exposure to
extreme temperatures and that they are
willing to pay non-trivial amounts to
mitigate those exposures where they
can. Studies of real world responses to
extreme temperatures including Graff
Zivin and Neidell (2014) and Rode et al.
(2022) found that workers decrease the
amount of labor they are willing to
supply (i.e., for workers who are able to
do so, they will shorten their work day
or choose to not work on a certain day)
when temperatures are extreme (with a
greater decrease in labor supplied when
temperatures are extremely hot versus
when they are extremely cold)
suggesting that workers prefer to forgo
wages rather than be exposed to extreme
temperatures. In cases where labor
markets are imperfectly competitive,
workers might benefit from this
proposed standard because they do not
have the option to avoid exposure to
extreme temperatures, even if they were
willing to forgo wages (for more on the
implications of imperfect labor market
competition for compensating
differentials, see, e.g., Burdett and
Mortensen, 1998; Sorkin, 2018). While
the interventions in this proposed
standard will not eliminate the need for
work to be performed in hot
environments, to the extent that these
interventions mitigate some of the
physical discomfort caused by heat,
employees may experience a decrease in
the disutility they face due to working
in hot environments.
While an individual’s utility or
disutility is difficult to measure, Li et al.
(2020) found that people expressed a
willingness to pay (WTP) between $2.60
and $4.60 per day to avoid a hot day.
WTP may not already be satisfied in the
labor market as a result of imperfect
competition, imperfect information,
binding minimum wages, or other
features of the market. This is not
perfectly analogous to utility but gives
a range for the value that individuals
place on avoiding excessive heat.
Assuming a point estimate of a WTP of
$3 per day 102 to mitigate the physical
101 In economic terms, disutility is the negative or
harmful effects of some activity or economic
transaction. In economics, individuals are assumed
to try to maximize their utility (and conversely
minimize their disutility).
102 This assumes a value on the lower end of what
Li et al. (2020) estimated since this proposed
standard will not entirely remove most employees
from hot environments. There are arguments to be
made that this might be an underestimate for a few
reasons. First, people have a higher WTP to avoid
very high temperatures so where this proposed
standard improves conditions for employees
exposed to very high temperatures, their WTP
PO 00000
Frm 00272
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
discomfort of working in hot
environments, all employees in the
scope of this proposed standard
receiving heat protections for 30 days on
average would equal benefits of $3.236
billion. Employees in many parts of the
country work in hot conditions for
many more than 30 days, meaning that,
if benefits to workers to mitigate the
negative physical effects of heat that do
not rise to the level of a heat injury or
illness were captured and monetized,
the benefits of this proposed standard
may be even greater than those shown
by the monetized safety and health
benefits.
Graff Zivin and Neidell (2014) found
that workers with high exposure to heat
reduced their labor supply by as much
as one hour per day when the
temperatures were above 85°F.103 Based
on an average loaded hourly wage of
$43.60 (the average for all at-risk
workers in the scope of the proposed
standard), if employees working in the
hottest environments (assumed here to
be the sum of workers exposed to
process heat and outdoor workers)
supply 5 additional hours of labor each
over the course of a year, they would
cumulatively receive additional wages
of $3.877 billion. Measures that improve
the comfort of employees and reduce
the negative physical effects of heat
could easily result in the small increase
in labor supply discussed here. As
mentioned previously, employers
benefit when employees produce more
so the benefits of increased labor supply
would be more than just the increased
wages paid to employees—employers’
revenue would increase because of
increased employee output as well.
V. Uncertainty
A few factors contribute to
uncertainty in the estimates of the
benefits of this proposed standard
including potential underreporting of
heat-related fatalities and HRIs,
uncertainty of the effectiveness of the
might be higher. Second, those surveyed by Li et
al. (2020) were not necessarily workers who were
working in high heat. Employee’s WTP for heat
mitigating measures might be higher than a general
individual’s WTP to avoid hot days in general since
employees have to perform physical labor in those
hot environments and because employees have less
control over workplace factors like resting, clothing
choices, or the ability to stay inside or to relocate
somewhere with air conditioning. Finally, those
surveyed by Li et al. (2020) may have included
nonworking individuals who may have a lower
income and therefore a lower WTP than individuals
who are working for wages.
103 Note that this change in labor supply refers to
real world effects seen where workers choose to
work fewer hours when temperatures are
excessively hot or cold (e.g., ending their workday
early, choosing to not work on certain days) and is
different from the productivity effects of rest breaks
discussed elsewhere.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
interventions required by the proposed
standard, and potential benefits of
improved labor productivity.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Underreporting
As discussed earlier, OSHA believes
the number of HRIs and heat-related
fatalities estimated from the BLS data is
likely underestimated compared to the
true number of HRIs and heat-related
fatalities in the United States. Research
suggests that HRIs and heat-related
fatalities are underreported in multiple
datasets (e.g., BLS CFOI, BLS SOII,
workers’ compensation claims data, and
hospital discharge data). The general
underreporting and undercounting of
occupational injuries and illnesses has
been a topic of multiple government
reports (e.g., Ruser, 2008; Miller, 2008;
GAO, 2009; Wiatrowski, 2014). While
there is a good deal of agreement that
some level of underreporting exists for
occupational injuries and illnesses in
general and HRIs specifically, there is
uncertainty regarding the magnitude of
underreporting. OSHA has adjusted for
underreporting of HRIs and heat-related
fatalities but there remains a wide range
of estimates of underreporting in the
research. There still remains a high level
of uncertainty in these estimates and the
magnitude of underreporting is
potentially considerably higher than
what OSHA has estimated. If the HRIs
were underreported by a factor of 10
rather than 7.5 (which is plausible based
on the available evidence) and this
proposed standard has the same
effectiveness, it could prevent about an
additional 11,500 HRIs which could
account for an additional $1.342 billion
in benefits.
B. Program Effectiveness
As explained above, for this benefits
analysis, OSHA assumes that the
proposed standard will be 65 percent
effective in curbing HRIs. This topic, the
relevant literature, and how the agency
arrived at its estimates of the standard’s
effectiveness are discussed in-depth in
Section V.C., Risk Reduction. As
discussed previously, OSHA found that
the literature on this issue lacks
certainty. Few studies included a
concurrent control group, rather most
studies looked at rates of HRI before and
after an intervention in the same group.
Studies were generally performed on
specific industries, or in specific
settings, and the effectiveness of the
intervention might be higher or lower
than the study average across the firms
and employees covered by this
rulemaking. Additionally, no study
tested an intervention that would
exactly match the controls required by
the proposed standard. For example,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
McCarthy et al. (2019) report a 60–90
percent decrease in the odds of HRI
among municipal outdoor workers in
Texas after a Heat Stress Awareness
Program (HSAP) intervention was
implemented in 2011. However, this
study lacked a control group that
received no intervention making it
difficult to determine if the reported
effectiveness could be attributed to the
intervention. While OSHA assumed the
effectiveness of the proposed standard
in preventing HRIs to be on the lower
end of what McCarthy et al. (2019)
found, there is evidence that the
effectiveness of heat interventions may
be much higher than that (See Section
V.C., Risk Reduction, for additional
discussion).
If the proposed standard were more
effective at preventing heat-related
fatalities and HRIs than OSHA estimates
in this analysis (and based on available
evidence this is plausible, see Section
V.C., Risk Reduction) and prevented all
fatalities (100 percent versus 95 percent)
and 10 percent more HRIs (75 percent
versus 65 percent), the proposed
standard might prevent 28 more
fatalities and about 2,500 more non-fatal
injuries and illnesses annually.
Monetized, this represents
approximately an additional $672
million in benefits.
C. Labor Productivity Losses
As discussed above in section
VIII.E.IV.A., OSHA has preliminarily
determined, based on numerous studies,
that there are labor productivity losses
from working in the heat that can be
partially recovered through the
provision of rest breaks. However,
precisely defining the magnitude of
labor productivity losses that could be
recuperated under the proposed
standard is difficult with the current
research available. This analysis rests on
specific assumptions and is dependent
on the extent of the available literature,
in which heat and productivity were
assessed in different settings with
different break policies, but break
policies did not vary within the same
setting. OSHA mentions those impacts
here, as well, to acknowledge the
uncertainty associated with those
estimates. This factor is examined in the
sensitivity analysis in Section VIII.C.
Costs of Compliance (section VIII.C.VI).
VI. Sensitivity Analysis
OSHA considers the rate of
effectiveness of the various measures of
this proposed standard a major source of
uncertainty in the calculation of
benefits. OSHA has compiled a
sensitivity analysis to illustrate the
range that could depict the benefits
PO 00000
Frm 00273
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70969
estimate. As shown below in table
VIII.E.6. for the low estimate, OSHA
estimated program effectiveness to be 50
percent for HRIs and 90 percent for
heat-related fatalities (as opposed to the
primary estimate of 65 percent
effectiveness for HRI prevention and 95
percent effectiveness for fatality
prevention). For the high estimate,
OSHA estimated 100 percent
effectiveness for the prevention of both
heat-related fatalities and HRIs by the
proposed standard (as opposed to the
primary estimate of 65 percent
effectiveness for HRI prevention and 95
percent effectiveness for fatality
prevention).
At the 50 percent level of
effectiveness, OSHA calculated
monetized benefits of avoided HRIs of
$1.437 billion. At the 90 percent level
of effectiveness, OSHA calculated
monetized benefits of avoided heatrelated fatalities of $6.926 billion. Both
estimates use the same VSI and VSL
discussed above. Total monetized
benefits at the 50 and 90 percent level
of effectiveness are $8.363 billion per
year.
At the 100 percent level of
effectiveness, the monetized benefits of
avoided HRIs are $2.875 billion per
year. The monetized benefits of avoided
heat-related fatalities at the same level
of effectiveness are $7.696 billion. Both
estimates use the same VSI and VSL
discussed above. Total monetized
benefits per year for the 100 percent
level of effectiveness are $10.570
billion.
The sensitivity analysis also looked at
the impact on the estimated number of
avoided HRIs and heat-related fatalities
under different assumptions of
underreporting, specifically (1)
alternative assumptions for the
underreporting related to HRIs,
assuming factors of 2 or 10 or no
underreporting and (2) alternative
assumptions regarding the
underreporting of heat-related fatalities,
assuming that heat-related fatalities
were underreported by factors of 3 or 15
or not underreported at all. The
estimated number of avoided HRIs and
avoided heat-related fatalities under
these alternative assumptions of
underreporting are presented in tables
VIII.E.6. and VIII.E.7. with OSHA’s
primary estimate of effectiveness as well
as under the low and high levels of
effectiveness discussed above.
Total monetized benefits per year
from avoided heat-related fatalities and
HRIs under different assumptions of
program effectiveness and
underreporting are presented in Table
VIII.E.8.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70970
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.E.6—SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS—HRIS
Primary estimate
(65% effectiveness)
Low estimate
(50% effectiveness)
2,137
4,274
21,369
16,027
$249,133,988
$498,267,975
$2,491,339,876
$1,868,504,907
1,644
3,288
16,438
12,328
$191,641,529
$383,283,058
$1,916,415,290
$1,437,311,467
Cases—No underreporting adjustment ...........................................................
Cases—Low underreporting (2X) ....................................................................
Cases—High underreporting (10X) .................................................................
Cases—Primary estimate underreporting (7.5X) ............................................
Monetized benefits, no underreporting adjustment .........................................
Monetized benefits, low underreporting (2X) ..................................................
Monetized benefits, high underreporting (10X) ...............................................
Monetized benefits, OSHA primary estimate underreporting (7.5X) ...............
High estimate
(100% effectiveness)
3,288
6,575
32,875
24,656
$383,283,058
$766,566,116
$3,832,830,579
$2,874,622,934
Source: OSHA estimate.
TABLE VIII.E.7—SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS—HEAT-RELATED FATALITIES
Primary estimate
(95% effectiveness)
Low estimate
(90% effectiveness)
37.9
113.8
568.86
530.936
$522,213,480
$1,566,640,440
$7,833,202,200
$7,310,988,720
35.9
107.8
538.92
502.992
$494,728,560
$1,484,185,680
$7,420,928,400
$6,926,199,840
Cases—No underreporting adjustment ...........................................................
Cases—Low underreporting (3X) ....................................................................
Cases—High underreporting (15X) .................................................................
Cases—Primary estimate underreporting (14X) .............................................
Monetized benefits, no underreporting adjustment underreporting ................
Monetized benefits, low underreporting (3X) ..................................................
Monetized benefits, high underreporting (15X) ...............................................
Monetized benefits, primary estimate underreporting (14X) ...........................
High estimate
(100% effectiveness)
39.9
119.8
598.8
558.88
$549,698,400
$1,649,095,200
$8,245,476,000
$7,695,777,600
Source: OSHA estimate.
TABLE VIII.E.8—SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS—TOTAL ESTIMATED BENEFITS
Primary
underreporting
estimate
No
underreporting
Low
underreporting
High
underreporting
Monetized Health and Safety Benefits
Low Effectiveness ............................................................
High Effectiveness ...........................................................
OSHA Primary Estimate Effectiveness ...........................
$8,363,511,307
10,570,400,534
9,179,493,627
$686,370,089
932,981,458
771,347,468
$1,867,468,738
2,415,661,316
2,064,908,415
$9,337,343,690
12,078,306,579
10,324,542,076
Source: OSHA estimate.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
VII. Conclusion
Uncertainty as to the magnitude of
underreporting and uncertainty as to the
effectiveness of the interventions
prescribed by this proposed standard
create substantial uncertainty in the
calculation of monetized benefits.
Additional uncertainty is added by the
magnitude of labor productivity benefits
from the required rest breaks. With the
caveat of multiple areas of uncertainty,
OSHA preliminarily concludes that this
proposed standard would have an
estimated $9.179 billion in total
annualized benefits.
F. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act, and Executive Order
13272 (Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking)
I. Introduction
The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, Public Law 104–121 (Mar. 29,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
1996), hereafter jointly referred to as the
RFA, requires Federal agencies to
consider the economic impact of a
proposed rulemaking on small entities.
The RFA states that whenever a Federal
agency is required to publish a general
notice of proposed rulemaking, the
agency must prepare and make available
for public comment an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (IRFA) (5 U.S.C.
603(a)). Pursuant to section 605(b),
instead of an IRFA, the head of an
agency may certify that the proposed
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. A factual basis
must support a certification. If the head
of an agency makes a certification, the
agency shall publish such certification
in the Federal Register at the time of
publication of a general notice of
proposed rulemaking or at the time of
publication of the final rule (5 U.S.C.
605(b)).
To determine whether OSHA can
certify that the proposed standard for
PO 00000
Frm 00274
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities, OSHA has developed a
screening test to consider the minimum
threshold effects of the proposed rule on
small entities. This screening test is
similar in concept to the revenue test
used in Section VIII.D., Economic
Feasibility, to identify minimum
threshold effects to demonstrate
economic feasibility. However, for this
IRFA the screening test is applied not to
all establishments but to small entities
(called ‘‘small business concerns’’ by
SBA).
OSHA is not able to certify that the
proposed rule will not result in a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
thus triggering the need for an IRFA.
Under the provisions of the RFA, as
amended in 1996, each such analysis
shall contain:
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
1. A description of the reasons why
action by the agency is being
considered;
2. A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
proposed rule;
3. A description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the proposed
rule will apply;
4. A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rule, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities that will be
subject to the requirements and the type
of professional skills necessary for the
preparation of the report or record;
5. An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
which may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed rule; and
6. A description and discussion of any
significant alternatives to the proposed
rule which accomplish the stated
objectives of applicable statutes and
which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule
on small entities, such as:
(a) The establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the
resources available to small entities;
(b) The clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule
for such small entities;
(c) The use of performance rather than
design standards; and
(d) An exemption from coverage of
the rule, or any part thereof, for such
small entities (5 U.S.C. 603, 607). The
RFA further states that the required
elements of the IRFA may be performed
in conjunction with or as part of any
other agenda or analysis required by any
other law if such other analysis satisfies
the provisions of the IRFA (5 U.S.C.
605). The remaining sections of this
chapter address each of the components
listed above.
II. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Description of the Reasons Why
Action by the Agency Is Being
Considered
Heat is the leading cause of death
among all weather-related phenomena
in the United States. Excessive heat
exacerbates existing health conditions
(e.g., asthma and heart disease) and can
cause heat stroke and even death if not
treated properly and promptly. Heatrelated illnesses are adverse clinical
health outcomes that occur due to
exposure to heat (e.g., heat exhaustion
or heat stroke). A heat-related injury is
an injury linked to heat exposure (e.g.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
a fall that occurred while a person was
experiencing dizziness related to heat
exposure).
Employees in both outdoor and
indoor work settings without adequate
climate controls are at risk of hazardous
heat exposure, which may lead to heatrelated illnesses and injuries (HRIs).
Certain heat-generating processes,
machinery, and equipment (e.g., hot tar
ovens, furnaces) can also cause HRIs
when effective cooling measures are not
in place. Some groups, such as pregnant
employees, may be more likely to
experience adverse health effects from
heat. In contrast, others are
disproportionately employed in work
settings with a higher risk of HRI, such
as workers of color in essential jobs.
The BLS SOII estimates that there
have been 39,450 work-related HRIs
involving days away from work between
2011 and 2022, for an average of 3,288
HRIs of this severity occurring per year
during this period. Additionally,
according to the BLS CFOI, exposure to
environmental heat has killed 479 U.S.
workers from 2011–2022, with an
average of 40 fatalities per year during
that period. As explained in Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, these statistics
likely do not capture the true magnitude
and prevalence of heat-related injuries,
illnesses, and fatalities. OSHA’s
estimates of the annual incidents of
heat-related fatalities and HRIs and the
number the agency expects will be
avoided by this proposed standard can
be found in Section VIII.E., Benefits.
OSHA has developed and published
recommendations for heat injury and
illness prevention. However, in the
absence of a Federal standard, multiple
States have issued regulations to
address heat hazards in the workplace.
Five States have enacted laws that aim
to protect employees exposed to heat:
Minnesota (Minn. R. 5205.0110);
California (Cal. Code of Regs. title 8,
section 3395); Washington (Wash.
Admin. Code sections 296–62–095
through 296–62–09560; 296307–097
through 296–307–09760); Oregon (Or.
Admin. R. 437–002–0156; Or. Admin. R.
437004–1131); and Colorado (7 Colo.
Code Regs section 1103–15:3).
OSHA has received multiple petitions
to promulgate a heat injury and illness
prevention standard in recent years,
including in 2018 from Public Citizen,
on behalf of approximately 130
organizations. Members of Congress
have also urged OSHA to initiate
rulemaking for a Federal heat standard.
In the Federal Register, OSHA
published an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) for Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings on October
PO 00000
Frm 00275
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70971
27, 2021 (86 FR 59309). From the
ANPRM, OSHA initiated the rulemaking
process to consider a heat-related injury
and illness prevention standard. The
standard would set forth the employer’s
obligations and the measures necessary
to protect employees to reduce the
number of HRIs and fatalities more
effectively among workers. The goal is
to prevent or reduce the number of
occupational HRIs and fatalities caused
by exposure to hazardous heat.
OSHA has developed potential
options for various elements of a heatspecific standard using: stakeholder
comments from the ANPRM; academic
literature; best practices from State heatspecific standards; recommendations
from the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) and the National Advisory
Committee on Occupational Safety and
Health (NACOSH); and other input from
experts, stakeholders, and the public.
As described in the benefits analysis
in Section VIII.E., Benefits, OSHA
estimates that approximately 559 heatrelated fatalities and approximately
24,656 HRIs among employees occur
annually. However, as explained in that
section, OSHA also believes there
remains a great deal of uncertainty
surrounding the extent of
underreporting and other parameters
used in this estimate.
B. Statement of the Objectives of and
Legal Basis for the Proposed Rule
The objective of the proposed
standard is to reduce the number of
HRIs and fatalities due to exposure to
hazardous heat occurring among
employees in the course of their work.
This objective would be achieved by
requiring employers to establish heat
injury and illness prevention plans
(HIIPPs); identify and monitor heat
hazards, provide rest breaks, adequate
water, and training; plan for, and be
ready to respond to, heat emergencies;
and take other steps to ensure that
employees can perform their duties
safely.
The legal basis for the rulemaking is
discussed in depth in Section II.,
Pertinent Legal Authority. In short,
Congress enacted the Occupational
Safety and Health (OSH) Act of 1970 (29
U.S.C. 651 et seq.), ‘‘to assure so far as
possible every working man and woman
in the Nation safe and healthful working
conditions and to preserve our human
resources’’ (29 U.S.C. 651(b)). To that
end, Congress authorized the Secretary
of Labor ‘‘to set mandatory occupational
safety and health standards applicable
to businesses affecting interstate
commerce’’ (29 U.S.C. 651(b)(3); see also
29 U.S.C. 655(b)).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70972
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
The OSH Act imposes several
requirements OSHA must satisfy before
adopting a safety standard. Among other
things, the standard must provide a high
degree of employee protection,
substantially reduce a significant risk to
workers, be technologically feasible, and
be economically feasible (see 58 FR
16612, 16614–16 (Mar. 30, 1993); Int’l
Union, United Auto., Aerospace &
Agric. Implement Workers of Am. v.
OSHA, 37 F.3d 665, 668–69 (D.C. Cir.
1994)). A standard is technologically
feasible if the protective measures it
requires already exist, can be brought
into existence with available
technology, or can be created with
technology that is reasonably expected
to be developed (see Am. Iron and Steel
Inst. v. OSHA, 939 F.2d 975, 980 (D.C.
Cir. 1991)). In determining economic
feasibility, OSHA must consider the cost
of compliance in an industry rather than
on individual employers. In its
economic analyses, OSHA ‘‘must
construct a reasonable estimate of
compliance costs and demonstrate a
reasonable likelihood that these costs
will not threaten the existence or
competitive structure of an industry,
even if it does portend disaster for some
marginal firms’’ (Am. Iron and Steel
Inst., 939 F.2d at 980, quoting United
Steelworkers of Am. v. Marshall, 647
F.2d 1189, 1272 (D.C. Cir. 1980)).
C. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rule Will Apply
Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected
Industries, of this PEA presents OSHA’s
preliminary analysis of the type and
number of small entities to which the
proposed rule would apply. To estimate
the number of small entities potentially
affected by this rulemaking, OSHA used
definitions developed by SBA for each
sector as well as the definition of a
small government and small non-profit
entity according to the RFA. OSHA
estimates the proposed rule would affect
approximately 2.0 million small
entities. Across these small entities,
roughly 16.2 million employees would
be protected by the proposed rule. Table
VIII.F.1. presents counts of small and
very small entities, establishments, and
employees by industry and region.
TABLE VIII.F.1—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE
INDUSTRY AND REGION
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
I Establishments
I Employees
Entities
I Establishments I Employees
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
475
24,294
16,193
199
26,346
16,211
478
24,322
16,208
199
26,377
16,268
831
149,091
115,421
1,399
169,979
314,889
466
15,065
12,736
138
17,326
10,009
466
15,065
12,738
138
17,331
10,012
544
55,208
53,826
1,082
62,951
58,338
Subtotal .........................................
83,717
83,853
751,608
55,739
55,750
231,950
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
14
1,192
1,999
38
1,814
1,509
15
1,282
2,128
41
1,946
1,596
216
25,975
40,838
679
34,426
28,722
27
2,192
3,358
52
2,855
2,311
27
2,231
3,409
52
2,898
2,345
202
18,113
27,914
395
23,385
18,858
Subtotal .........................................
6,566
7,009
130,856
10,795
10,962
88,866
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Commercial Kitchens
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
509
36,119
65,298
1,282
42,239
38,954
579
40,201
69,963
1,388
47,058
43,511
4,603
472,283
724,441
16,812
571,817
487,920
430
26,822
51,676
946
31,027
29,838
432
26,939
51,830
949
31,159
30,051
1,745
130,727
233,251
4,411
145,802
149,486
Subtotal .........................................
184,402
202,700
2,277,876
140,740
141,361
665,422
Construction
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
2,383
158,425
230,158
3,308
163,896
151,930
2,400
158,752
230,528
3,317
164,295
152,258
6,784
562,118
840,221
15,761
695,987
602,318
2,277
147,997
214,268
2,986
149,782
140,362
2,279
148,028
214,313
2,986
149,827
140,392
4,532
315,449
467,181
8,179
359,212
322,939
Subtotal .........................................
710,101
711,550
2,723,189
657,671
657,825
1,477,491
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00276
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70973
TABLE VIII.F.1—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE
INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
I Establishments
I Employees
Entities
I Establishments I Employees
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
17
1,929
5,626
39
3,087
2,352
19
2,171
5,994
41
3,449
2,501
95
8,814
17,624
313
12,989
8,319
16
1,754
5,330
32
2,843
2,214
17
1,797
5,438
34
2,951
2,268
69
4,391
10,761
83
7,977
5,138
Subtotal .........................................
13,051
14,174
48,155
12,190
12,506
28,419
Landscaping and Facilities Support
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
105
11,364
18,330
223
12,805
9,634
109
11,974
19,096
250
13,271
9,974
1,938
165,112
270,325
5,027
200,425
152,217
98
10,565
17,103
202
11,867
8,953
99
10,796
17,308
203
11,974
9,030
860
82,930
131,677
2,067
101,006
77,219
Subtotal .........................................
52,461
54,673
795,043
48,789
49,410
395,758
Maintenance and Repair
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
174
19,068
25,688
304
20,023
15,931
186
19,653
26,211
318
20,552
16,477
1,055
108,461
144,821
1,926
117,782
100,556
174
19,174
25,704
304
20,239
16,000
176
19,344
25,857
306
20,395
16,166
821
84,101
113,180
1,384
87,092
72,908
Subtotal .........................................
81,188
83,397
474,600
81,595
82,245
359,487
Manufacturing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
161
28,332
33,582
282
24,499
24,347
180
29,454
34,481
288
25,279
24,818
1,703
617,095
611,009
2,422
450,901
337,592
141
20,447
25,312
248
18,822
19,945
147
20,529
25,388
248
18,884
19,989
430
95,353
112,950
818
83,417
76,876
Subtotal .........................................
111,203
114,500
2,020,722
84,915
85,185
369,844
Oil and Gas
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
53
2,861
1,391
0
10,562
1,561
61
3,003
1,458
0
11,375
1,631
692
15,645
9,518
0
87,027
9,034
29
2,423
1,116
0
8,658
1,306
29
2,443
1,125
0
8,691
1,308
70
4,948
2,497
0
17,744
2,807
Subtotal .........................................
16,428
17,527
121,915
13,532
13,596
28,065
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Postal and Delivery Services
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
21
1,374
2,238
25
1,965
1,533
33
1,951
3,001
36
2,731
2,081
34
11,199
18,998
56
17,147
17,285
18
1,168
1,899
20
1,709
1,302
18
1,171
1,900
20
1,720
1,309
26
1,544
2,351
27
2,104
1,733
Subtotal .........................................
7,155
9,832
64,719
6,115
6,139
7,785
243
8,093
244
8,131
407
23,284
Recreation and Amusement
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
258
9,660
PO 00000
Frm 00277
262
9,978
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
836
76,652
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70974
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.1—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE
INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
14,184
176
9,058
7,620
14,593
182
9,335
7,976
126,221
1,996
79,313
68,703
11,535
131
7,510
6,226
11,573
131
7,547
6,251
34,163
387
22,207
18,228
Subtotal .........................................
40,956
42,326
353,720
33,738
33,877
98,674
Sanitation and Waste Removal
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
17
598
908
13
579
403
17
613
925
16
600
416
260
11,803
21,423
510
13,810
10,566
16
519
763
10
481
333
16
519
765
10
482
334
144
5,716
8,892
186
5,650
4,111
Subtotal .........................................
2,517
2,586
58,372
2,120
2,125
24,699
Telecommunications
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
0
6
11
0
14
14
0
6
12
0
16
14
0
28
108
0
124
71
4
281
370
2
341
271
4
303
388
3
361
286
18
1,237
1,356
13
1,341
1,089
Subtotal .........................................
46
48
332
1,269
1,344
5,054
Temporary Help Services
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
3
746
1,258
9
1,001
734
3
785
1,305
10
1,064
765
111
58,271
92,651
1,444
81,872
47,601
2
487
845
5
663
520
2
490
847
5
666
525
24
4,506
7,409
43
5,193
3,995
Subtotal .........................................
3,752
3,933
281,950
2,522
2,537
21,170
Transportation
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
472
35,362
30,938
336
30,063
22,303
551
35,967
31,687
378
31,185
23,056
2,648
100,567
109,558
3,401
121,185
77,739
402
32,172
27,247
248
26,656
19,941
407
32,196
27,290
252
26,726
20,008
779
40,920
38,381
513
38,318
26,654
Subtotal .........................................
119,474
122,823
415,098
106,667
106,879
145,566
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Utilities
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
56
1,169
1,235
12
2,393
1,279
86
2,078
2,285
25
3,494
1,717
742
18,326
22,667
105
28,343
11,810
34
711
835
9
1,911
1,067
37
760
957
9
1,960
1,103
110
2,076
2,177
28
4,049
3,123
Subtotal .........................................
6,144
9,686
81,995
4,568
4,826
11,564
126
70,279
105,756
449
87,420
10
732
1,034
8
965
10
753
1,051
8
975
17
1,639
2,412
34
2,066
Warehousing
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
21
2,193
2,820
42
2,570
PO 00000
Frm 00278
22
3,078
3,920
51
3,800
Fmt 4701
I
Sfmt 4702
I
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
I
30AUP2
I
70975
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.1—PROFILE OF SMALL AND VERY SMALL AFFECTED ENTITIES, ESTABLISHMENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, BY CORE
INDUSTRY AND REGION—Continued
Small (SBA/RFA)
Very small (<20)
Region
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Entities
Establishments
Employees
Western ................................................
2,035
2,888
67,352
806
820
1,817
Subtotal .........................................
9,681
13,759
331,382
3,555
3,618
7,985
Non-Core
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
1,503
109,785
175,885
2,738
133,234
113,249
1,582
114,774
181,593
2,857
138,262
117,242
14,497
1,251,037
1,867,095
22,687
1,099,714
1,000,087
1,594
117,012
189,755
2,818
147,342
122,703
1,620
117,910
190,941
2,851
148,376
123,582
5,729
428,271
648,153
9,578
508,465
423,075
Subtotal .........................................
536,394
556,310
5,255,118
581,225
585,280
2,023,270
Total
Alaskan ................................................
Central ..................................................
Eastern .................................................
Pacific ...................................................
Southern ...............................................
Western ................................................
6,241
444,478
627,742
9,027
486,148
411,599
6,582
460,042
645,388
9,397
504,089
425,189
37,172
3,722,756
5,138,694
74,988
3,870,261
3,342,781
5,982
407,614
590,884
8,161
450,999
384,105
6,031
409,405
593,119
8,205
452,925
385,778
16,526
1,300,411
1,898,531
29,227
1,477,979
1,268,393
Total ..............................................
1,985,235
2,050,685
16,186,651
1,847,745
1,855,463
5,991,068
Source: OSHA, based on BLS 2023c; Census Bureau, 2021a; Census Bureau, 2023a; Census Bureau, 2023d; SBA, 2023; USDA, 2019; and
USFA, 2023.
Note: Due to rounding, figures in the columns and rows may not sum to the totals shown.
E. Description of the Projected
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the
Proposed Rule
OSHA calculates costs for small
entities, as defined by SBA (SBA, 2023)
and the RFA, and for ‘‘very small’’
entities, defined by OSHA as those with
fewer than 20 employees, in each
industry. To estimate costs for these
small and very small entities, OSHA
first calculates for each 4-digit NAICS
industry and State combination, the
average one-time cost per establishment,
average annual cost per establishment,
average one-time cost per employee, and
average annual cost per employee for
each provision. Since OSHA assumes
the indoor work area hazard evaluation
is completed every five years, average
per-establishment and average peremployee costs are taken for the
corresponding cost items. OSHA then
multiplies these estimates by the
number of small, affected
establishments or affected employees at
small establishments to derive one-time
and annual costs for each provision of
the proposed standard. One-time costs
are annualized to determine total
annualized costs by provision of the
proposed standard. This same
methodology is applied to the very
small business analysis.
Table VIII.F.2. below shows across all
provisions of the proposed rule, that
small entities are estimated to incur
annualized costs of approximately $3.9
billion for 2.0 million entities while 1.8
million very small entities are estimated
to incur annualized costs of about $2.2
billion. The costs by provision are
shown below while the detailed
discussion of the unit costs, other
parameters, and methodology are
included in Section VIII.C., Costs of
Compliance. Requirements at or above
the high heat trigger (which includes
requirements for rest breaks) are the
most expensive provision for small
entities, accounting for almost half of
overall costs. The second most
expensive provision of this proposed
rule for small entities is the
requirements at or above the initial heat
trigger provision, which accounts for
about 12.5 percent of costs overall.
TABLE VIII.F.2—TOTAL COSTS OF THE PROPOSED HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION STANDARD BY PROVISION FOR
SMALL ENTITIES
[2023$]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Provision
One-time
Annual
0%
Rule Familiarization .........................
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
Plan ..............................................
Identifying Heat Hazards .................
Requirements at or above the Initial
Heat Trigger .................................
Requirements at or above the High
Heat Trigger .................................
Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning ...................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Costs savings
2%
0%
2%
$126,197,841
$0
$0
$0
$0
$12,619,784
$14,049,167
797,869,328
51,433,925
0
216,486,243
0
202,237,502
142,832,518
270,810,603
0
0
222,619,451
297,602,620
231,656,540
299,050,963
257,883,589
0
0
651,324,232
35,815,071
641,297,520
644,218,446
3,616,156
0
0
6,173,098,461
4,288,986,520
1,884,473,557
1,884,514,515
203,967,646
0
0
459,558,305
0
479,955,069
482,265,315
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00279
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70976
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.2—TOTAL COSTS OF THE PROPOSED HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION STANDARD BY PROVISION FOR
SMALL ENTITIES—Continued
[2023$]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
Provision
One-time
Annual
0%
Costs savings
2%
0%
2%
Training ...........................................
822,601,053
0
0
216,052,591
0
298,312,696
307,629,910
Total .........................................
2,263,569,538
216,486,243
202,237,502
7,913,676,711
4,324,801,590
3,836,880,698
3,863,384,856
Source: OSHA.
a The total costs with cost savings accounts for the potential labor productivity loss avoided by having more efficient and effective rest breaks required by the proposed standard than are currently taken.
TABLE VIII.F.3—TOTAL COSTS OF THE PROPOSED HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION STANDARD BY PROVISION FOR
VERY SMALL ENTITIES
[2023$]
Total annualized a
Periodic costs annualized
Provision
One-time
Annual
0%
Costs savings
2%
0%
2%
Rule Familiarization .........................
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
Plan ..............................................
Identifying Heat Hazards .................
Requirements at or above the Initial
Heat Trigger .................................
Requirements at or above the High
Heat Trigger .................................
Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning ...................
Training ...........................................
$114,091,454
$0
$0
$0
$0
$11,409,145
$12,701,405
722,235,085
48,640,027
0
188,281,796
0
175,889,421
129,326,342
254,469,418
0
0
201,549,851
278,161,601
209,730,267
279,465,502
123,616,262
0
0
252,006,494
13,475,322
250,892,798
252,292,941
2,654,923
0
0
2,476,140,705
1,705,554,474
770,851,723
770,881,794
192,369,277
609,255,824
0
0
0
0
433,352,739
129,732,988
0
0
452,589,667
190,658,570
454,768,543
197,559,323
Total .........................................
1,812,663,317
188,281,796
175,889,421
3,682,138,934
1,719,029,797
2,163,203,649
2,184,487,809
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Source: OSHA.
a The total costs with cost savings accounts for the potential labor productivity loss avoided by having more efficient and effective rest breaks required by the proposed standard than are currently taken.
Table VIII.F.4. presents the average
costs per small entity, while table
VIII.F.5. presents the average costs per
very small entity. On average, nearly 2.0
million small entities are estimated to
incur costs of $1,950 annually to
comply with the proposed standard.
Fishing (NAICS 1141) are estimated to
have the lowest costs of compliance of
the covered small entities—$461 on
average annually to comply with the
proposed rule. The small entities with
the largest costs, Psychiatric and
Substance Abuse Hospitals (NAICS
6222), would spend an estimated
$118,974 annually to comply with the
proposed standard.
On average, about 1.8 million very
small entities are estimated to incur
costs of $1,182 annually to comply with
the proposed standard. The smallest
average costs per very small entity are
incurred by Fishing (NAICS 1141)—
estimated to be $459 on average
annually to comply with the proposed
standard. The highest average costs for
very small establishments are incurred
by Specialty (except Psychiatric and
Substance Abuse) Hospitals (NAICS
6223) and are estimated to be about
$45,066 annually.
The potential small entity impacts of
the proposed rule were derived based
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
on the methodology detailed in Section
VIII.D., Economic Feasibility. Table
VIII.F.5. shows that, while small entities
in most industries are estimated to have
costs that are well below one percent of
revenue, a few are estimated to
experience costs that exceed one
percent of revenues. Costs as a
percentage of revenues for these entities
vary from less than 0.01 percent for
Tobacco Manufacturing (NAICS 3122)
and Petroleum and Coal Products
Manufacturing (NAICS 3241) to 2.84
percent for Child Care Services (NAICS
6244). Note that the costs in these tables
were annualized using a 2 percent
discount rate. The impacts for very
small entities can be seen in table
VIII.F.6.
As with the small entity impact
analysis, the very small entity impact
analysis shows that, in the majority of
industries, the average impacts per
entity are well below the one percent
threshold. Impacts range from 0.01
percent for a few industries such as
Petroleum and Coal Products
Manufacturing (NAICS 3241), and
Motor Vehicle.
As discussed in depth in Section
VIII.D., Economic Feasibility, the agency
believes some of the estimated impact in
some of these industries is likely
PO 00000
Frm 00280
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
overstated, due to inflexibility in the
cost analysis regarding the amount of
time spent outside in heat in a
nondiscretionary manner. For example,
even if the assumption that these
employees spend a large percentage of
their time outside is realistic under
normal circumstances, childcare
providers and in-person health care
providers would likely limit their time
outside in high heat situations if only to
protect those in their care. If the costs
of complying with this proposed
standard were onerous, limiting
employee exposure to the outdoors
during times of extreme heat would be
a costless method to comply with the
standard and could possibly result in
these employers being fully exempt
from the standard (e.g., if the employer
limited employee’s outdoor exposure to
meet the exemption for short duration
employee exposure). OSHA’s cost
estimates did not take changes in
employee scheduling into account and
therefore may have overestimated costs
to employers whose employees have
discretion regarding the amount of time
they spend outside.
NAICS 1124 Sheep and Goat Farming
and NAICS 1129 Other Animal
Production are both heavily weighted to
very small family-owned farms (USDA,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
2019). Due to a Congressional budget
rider, OSHA is not able to expend funds
on enforcement activities for small
farms. Only about 5 percent of sheep
and goat farms and 12 percent of
combined Other Animal Production and
Aquaculture are something other than
family-owned farms (i.e., partnerships
or corporations). (Given the economies
of scale necessary for aquaculture, it’s
likely that these account for more of the
corporate farms in the combined Other
Animal Production and Aquaculture
data meaning more farms in NAICS
1129 may be family-owned farms than
appear to be in the combined data.)
Based on the Census of Agriculture,
about 20,000 of about 79,000 total sheep
and goat farms have hired labor and
those have 2 hired laborers on average.
For other animal production and
aquaculture combined, about 35,000
farms out of about 190,000 total farms
report having hired labor and have an
average of 3.5 hire laborers. Based on
the size and organization of these farms,
it is unlikely OSHA would be enforcing
this standard on those industries so they
would not incur compliance costs.
OSHA welcomes feedback on this
70977
analysis of the impact on small and very
small entities
The costs of this proposed standard
are largely employee-based and the
agency has not found there to be
feasibility concerns for entities of any
size. Therefore, the agency believes that
including large non-profits in the profile
of SBA/RFA defined small entities
would not alter the findings of the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
OSHA welcomes comment regarding the
inclusion of large non-profits in the
profile of SBA/RFA defined small
entities.
TABLE VIII.F.4—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
NAICS
1111
1112
1113
1114
1119
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1129
1131
1132
1133
1141
1142
1151
1152
1153
2111
2131
2211
2212
2213
2361
2362
2371
2372
2373
2379
2381
2382
2383
2389
3111
3112
3113
3114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3121
3122
3131
3132
3133
3141
3149
3152
3159
3161
3162
3211
3212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Entities
Oilseed and Grain Farming .................................................
Vegetable and Melon Farming ............................................
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming ................................................
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production ............
Other Crop Farming ............................................................
Cattle Ranching and Farming .............................................
Hog and Pig Farming ..........................................................
Poultry and Egg Production ................................................
Sheep and Goat Farming ....................................................
Aquaculture .........................................................................
Other Animal Production .....................................................
Timber Tract Operations .....................................................
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products ...........
Logging ................................................................................
Fishing .................................................................................
Hunting and Trapping ..........................................................
Support Activities for Crop Production ................................
Support Activities for Animal Production .............................
Support Activities for Forestry .............................................
Oil and Gas Extraction ........................................................
Support Activities for Mining ...............................................
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution
Natural Gas Distribution ......................................................
Water, Sewage and Other Systems ...................................
Residential Building Construction .......................................
Nonresidential Building Construction ..................................
Utility System Construction .................................................
Land Subdivision .................................................................
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction ..........................
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction ...............
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors ..
Building Equipment Contractors ..........................................
Building Finishing Contractors ............................................
Other Specialty Trade Contractors .....................................
Animal Food Manufacturing ................................................
Grain and Oilseed Milling ....................................................
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing ...............
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing ...............................................
Animal Slaughtering and Processing ..................................
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging .....................
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing ...................................
Other Food Manufacturing ..................................................
Beverage Manufacturing .....................................................
Tobacco Manufacturing .......................................................
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills .............................................
Fabric Mills ..........................................................................
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating Mills ........
Textile Furnishings Mills ......................................................
Other Textile Product Mills ..................................................
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing ..................................
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing .....
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing ............................
Footwear Manufacturing ......................................................
Sawmills and Wood Preservation .......................................
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00281
Fmt 4701
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
12,511
2,127
6,121
2,720
9,564
18,428
1,048
2,278
1,548
160
4,913
442
150
7,980
2,432
351
4,648
4,640
1,658
5,307
10,921
2,058
418
3,668
171,099
40,735
16,774
4,805
8,285
4,056
91,279
177,612
114,496
68,126
636
250
868
743
$13,585,428
9,980,549
14,284,547
12,359,299
15,497,239
28,781,484
2,182,612
4,700,946
2,393,222
616,482
7,999,112
439,946
152,566
7,648,751
1,113,045
374,292
5,853,520
3,376,198
1,398,749
16,476,736
43,981,568
28,171,559
3,527,573
7,573,926
106,947,179
62,520,995
34,191,049
3,170,977
17,087,777
6,569,839
125,277,109
233,824,679
106,453,318
72,672,079
1,601,425
1,211,561
2,204,453
3,725,663
$1,086
4,693
2,334
4,544
1,620
1,562
2,082
2,064
1,546
3,859
1,628
996
1,017
958
458
1,066
1,259
728
844
3,105
4,027
13,690
8,436
2,065
625
1,535
2,038
660
2,062
1,620
1,372
1,316
930
1,067
2,520
4,854
2,539
5,016
$759,359
1,153,664
682,745
741,146
282,465
700,078
2,601,611
2,939,009
88,910
1,133,734
115,067
1,501,147
790,399
1,563,286
853,204
799,221
2,707,767
506,802
1,111,045
26,579,145
3,821,423
76,221,412
70,106,856
1,410,992
1,421,852
6,719,320
3,633,655
1,877,172
6,724,608
3,024,764
1,699,487
1,621,258
1,078,107
1,929,027
24,357,224
62,037,403
9,556,299
25,690,434
0.14
0.41
0.34
0.61
0.57
0.22
0.08
0.07
1.74
0.34
1.41
0.07
0.13
0.06
0.05
0.13
0.05
0.14
0.08
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.01
0.15
0.04
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.02
588
1,456
221
5,471
1,655
4,226
58
102
345
378
769
1,981
1,485
279
75
102
1,425
169
2,637,411
12,280,924
902,567
11,517,147
5,268,917
6,542,557
515,881
1,037,014
1,937,288
1,346,267
2,410,151
2,870,758
1,708,817
488,329
78,767
410,499
5,001,937
1,273,144
4,484
8,438
4,087
2,105
3,183
1,548
8,848
10,139
5,609
3,565
3,134
1,449
1,151
1,750
1,048
4,029
3,510
7,533
49,929,979
38,292,294
22,008,470
3,818,211
16,374,321
8,758,819
182,294,825
19,374,286
12,945,642
7,871,921
5,547,861
2,012,712
907,132
1,772,440
6,384,614
5,074,485
7,582,835
21,682,868
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.13
0.10
0.02
0.08
0.05
0.03
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70978
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.4—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3219
3221
3222
3231
3241
3251
3252
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3253 ..................
3254 ..................
3255 ..................
3256 ..................
3259
3261
3262
3271
3272
3273
3274
3279
3311
3312
3313
3314
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3315
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3328 ..................
3329 ..................
3331 ..................
3332 ..................
3334 ..................
3335 ..................
3336 ..................
3339
3341
3342
3343
3344
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
3345 ..................
3352
3353
3359
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3369
3371
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3372
3379
3391
3399
4231
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4232 ..................
4233 ..................
4234 ..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Other Wood Product Manufacturing ...................................
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills .....................................
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing ............................
Printing and Related Support Activities ..............................
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing .....................
Basic Chemical Manufacturing ............................................
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing .....................
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing ......................
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing ...
Plastics Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Rubber Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing .......................
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing ............................
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing ...................
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing .........................
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing .............
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing .............
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased Steel ...........
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing ...........
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production and
Processing.
Foundries .............................................................................
Forging and Stamping .........................................................
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing ..................................
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing .............
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing .........
Hardware Manufacturing .....................................................
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing .............................
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and
Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities ....
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing ..................
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing ....................................
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial
Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing ..............................
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment
Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing .............
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing ..........
Communications Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Household Appliance Manufacturing ..................................
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing ....................................
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing ..............................................
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing ..................
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing .....................................
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing .....................
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing .................................
Ship and Boat Building ........................................................
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing .................
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen Cabinet
Manufacturing.
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing ............
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing .................
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing ................
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing ....................................
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers .....
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant
Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies
Merchant Wholesalers.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00282
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
4,412
35
1,264
12,027
464
642
530
11,586,726
855,082
6,774,484
11,573,349
3,199,326
4,655,288
4,077,855
2,626
24,193
5,360
962
6,895
7,251
7,695
4,072,371
136,863,576
24,890,031
2,522,782
177,980,216
78,530,261
52,682,176
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.00
0.01
0.01
355
1,140,904
3,217
18,940,264
0.02
925
705
1,002
5,779,821
2,479,397
3,477,371
6,251
3,516
3,470
51,766,648
16,249,794
17,908,986
0.01
0.02
0.02
872
4,134
699
463
706
2,173
74
1,369
191
246
155
309
2,542,871
19,980,060
3,192,709
1,199,726
1,989,379
8,394,899
303,318
3,198,469
2,633,059
1,720,852
1,282,335
1,616,110
2,916
4,833
4,565
2,590
2,819
3,863
4,126
2,336
13,753
6,991
8,290
5,227
12,165,378
13,921,131
12,772,546
5,587,274
6,976,531
8,676,117
15,209,592
5,186,460
115,596,140
28,374,263
35,439,130
39,316,152
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
691
991
529
5,974
589
272
492
11,032
2,989,596
2,784,200
928,777
16,517,707
2,689,023
770,518
1,152,112
15,208,419
4,329
2,810
1,755
2,765
4,567
2,836
2,340
1,379
11,281,321
10,193,180
5,517,119
5,735,883
12,577,513
8,866,155
6,269,990
2,901,748
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.05
2,521
2,806
1,247
5,835,961
7,766,243
5,944,680
2,315
2,767
4,766
4,178,955
7,493,462
18,417,556
0.06
0.04
0.03
425
699
1,030,865
3,921,041
2,425
5,609
10,195,646
15,601,508
0.02
0.04
3,010
337
4,202,594
1,582,741
1,396
4,698
4,357,322
25,365,617
0.03
0.02
1,762
415
547
219
1,680
5,979,770
490,089
1,256,142
262,564
4,552,187
3,394
1,182
2,294
1,198
2,709
12,034,903
8,911,705
13,522,113
5,604,208
13,079,398
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
2,157
4,626,878
2,145
12,820,769
0.02
101
852
752
23
803
1,978
646
74
658
392
4,766
332,021
2,906,501
2,497,573
51,856
4,874,596
13,487,337
3,977,519
567,108
7,118,392
641,075
9,401,064
3,290
3,411
3,319
2,260
6,071
6,817
6,160
7,707
10,818
1,635
1,972
14,304,913
10,715,020
12,404,672
58,221,416
15,741,094
32,394,740
29,941,829
33,655,605
14,164,896
6,718,062
2,859,010
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.02
0.07
1,690
326
4,621
8,582
1,544
3,989,090
1,166,170
7,495,312
11,161,673
11,511,623
2,360
3,581
1,622
1,301
7,456
5,125,287
8,591,445
4,733,183
2,660,648
8,053,146
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.05
0.09
1,077
993
5,781,729
5,631,821
5,367
5,671
5,828,655
6,885,143
0.09
0.08
2,259
10,168,859
4,501
5,929,082
0.08
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70979
TABLE VIII.F.4—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
4235 ..................
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic
Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers .......
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers ..............
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers ......
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers ........
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers ...........
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers ........
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers ................................
Automobile Dealers .............................................................
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers ...............................................
Building Material and Supplies Dealers ..............................
Grocery and Convenience Retailers ...................................
Specialty Food Retailers .....................................................
Scheduled Air Transportation ..............................................
Nonscheduled Air Transportation ........................................
Rail Transportation ..............................................................
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation ................................................
General Freight Trucking ....................................................
Specialized Freight Trucking ...............................................
Urban Transit Systems ........................................................
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation ...........................
Taxi and Limousine Service ................................................
School and Employee Bus Transportation .........................
Charter Bus Industry ...........................................................
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation ........
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil ...................................
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas ...............................
Other Pipeline Transportation .............................................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land ....................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water ..................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other ...................
Support Activities for Air Transportation .............................
Support Activities for Rail Transportation ...........................
Support Activities for Water Transportation ........................
Support Activities for Road Transportation .........................
Freight Transportation Arrangement ...................................
Other Support Activities for Transportation .........................
Couriers and Express Delivery Services ............................
Local Messengers and Local Delivery ................................
Warehousing and Storage ..................................................
Motion Picture and Video Industries ...................................
Sound Recording Industries ................................................
Satellite Telecommunications ..............................................
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing,
Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Depository Credit Intermediation .........................................
Nondepository Credit Intermediation ...................................
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation ..........................
Securities and Commodity Exchanges ...............................
Other Financial Investment Activities ..................................
Insurance Carriers ...............................................................
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds .............................
Other Investment Pools and Funds ....................................
Lessors of Real Estate ........................................................
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers ........................
Activities Related to Real Estate .........................................
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing ........................
Consumer Goods Rental .....................................................
General Rental Centers ......................................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment
Rental and Leasing.
4236 ..................
4237 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4238 ..................
4239
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4249
4251
4411
4412
4441
4451
4452
4811
4812
4821
4831
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4832
4841
4842
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4859
4861
4862
4869
4871
4872
4879
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4889
4921
4922
4931
5121
5122
5174
5182
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5221
5222
5223
5232
5239
5241
5242
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5251
5259
5311
5312
5313
5321
5322
5323
5324
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00283
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
709
4,763,004
6,715
13,288,617
0.05
1,907
11,364,290
5,960
8,540,329
0.07
1,026
5,820,745
5,674
6,361,789
0.09
4,033
29,834,160
7,398
5,737,517
0.13
2,831
717
662
386
2,662
325
809
376
326
10,561,663
3,784,639
4,340,575
1,344,807
15,934,090
2,641,457
4,315,458
3,206,820
3,172,050
3,731
5,277
6,561
3,483
5,986
8,119
5,336
8,522
9,724
5,222,434
5,821,550
10,574,055
5,167,182
10,630,078
23,756,996
8,980,738
61,864,570
13,306,719
0.07
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.06
0.01
0.07
2,124
3,749
6,500
955
544
6,886
1,180
727
1,637
113
606
10,353,521
9,368,912
37,276,607
3,490,111
1,021,683
22,913,996
2,429,585
10,339,037
3,179,136
78,448
2,154,113
4,876
2,499
5,735
3,656
1,877
3,328
2,059
14,225
1,942
697
3,553
5,895,079
12,764,272
15,961,277
5,414,403
2,831,193
3,311,379
1,053,778
97,899,634
6,496,273
1,132,927
16,994,169
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.07
0.10
0.20
0.01
0.03
0.06
0.02
410
55,843
39,386
513
488
6,453
2,232
978
3,856
70
59
71
572
1,479
229
3,639
494
1,852
9,012
12,925
1,387
3,724
3,431
9,681
2,568
466
46
1,352
1,791,814
50,365,637
41,886,506
590,618
896,937
7,243,177
3,191,204
1,507,466
3,185,344
347,281
90,847
269,120
1,034,717
2,781,692
354,470
7,427,615
1,414,555
6,207,901
6,993,625
18,974,056
1,669,460
12,926,412
3,012,249
56,004,514
7,638,794
946,190
165,892
3,731,170
4,371
902
1,063
1,151
1,837
1,122
1,430
1,541
826
4,984
1,528
3,788
1,808
1,881
1,551
2,041
2,861
3,353
776
1,468
1,203
3,471
878
5,785
2,975
2,032
3,602
2,759
6,386,189
1,458,914
1,812,364
2,151,325
2,488,321
862,937
2,019,525
2,813,587
1,343,491
28,045,336
15,269,599
22,870,110
1,542,634
961,471
1,442,518
2,726,627
3,694,856
4,619,864
1,019,225
2,467,206
1,765,588
9,170,589
1,312,866
3,692,460
1,544,741
1,914,032
3,473,723
2,821,642
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.07
0.13
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.12
0.20
0.11
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.07
0.16
0.19
0.11
0.10
0.10
1,562
1,085
1,822
1
1,542
724
18,002
21,857,409
3,521,500
4,068,120
26,178
3,322,810
7,767,572
37,871,610
13,995
3,245
2,232
39,745
2,154
10,729
2,104
15,334,364
2,825,317
1,274,881
753,808,884
3,014,962
64,751,762
884,543
0.09
0.11
0.18
0.01
0.07
0.02
0.24
161
122
13,445
14,553
10,787
567
1,185
318
1,171
187,816
253,899
32,370,835
27,775,521
33,316,314
2,987,344
5,301,598
1,344,257
5,466,318
1,164
2,075
2,408
1,909
3,088
5,267
4,475
4,222
4,667
860,458
1,915,830
1,498,519
848,299
865,500
2,647,455
1,093,599
1,436,198
3,114,198
0.14
0.11
0.16
0.22
0.36
0.20
0.41
0.29
0.15
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70980
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.4—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
Industry
5331 ..................
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services .....................................................................
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll
Services.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services ..............
Specialized Design Services ...............................................
Computer Systems Design and Related Services ..............
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services .................
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services ..........
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services ......
Management of Companies and Enterprises .....................
Office Administrative Services ............................................
Facilities Support Services ..................................................
Employment Services ..........................................................
Business Support Services .................................................
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services ..................
Investigation and Security Services ....................................
Services to Buildings and Dwellings ...................................
Other Support Services .......................................................
Waste Collection .................................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ...........................................
Remediation and Other Waste Management Services ......
Elementary and Secondary Schools ...................................
Junior Colleges ....................................................................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools ...............
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools .............................................
Other Schools and Instruction .............................................
Educational Support Services .............................................
Offices of Physicians ...........................................................
Offices of Dentists ...............................................................
Offices of Other Health Practitioners ..................................
Outpatient Care Centers .....................................................
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories ..................................
Home Health Care Services ...............................................
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services .............................
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals .............................
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ......................
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities) .............
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability,
Mental Health, and Substance Abuse Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted
Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities ........................................
Individual and Family Services ...........................................
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency and Other
Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services ......................................
Child Care Services ............................................................
Performing Arts Companies ................................................
Spectator Sports ..................................................................
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers,
and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers .....................
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions ............
Amusement Parks and Arcades .........................................
Gambling Industries ............................................................
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries .....................
Traveler Accommodation ....................................................
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers’ Camps.
Special Food Services ........................................................
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) ...............................
Restaurants and Other Eating Places ................................
Automotive Repair and Maintenance ..................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance
5411 ..................
5412 ..................
5413
5414
5415
5416
..................
..................
..................
..................
5417
5418
5419
5511
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5619
5621
5622
5629
6111
6112
6113
6114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6115
6116
6117
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6219
6221
6222
6223
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6231 ..................
6232 ..................
6233 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
6239 ..................
6241 ..................
6242 ..................
6243
6244
7111
7112
7113
7114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7115
7121
7131
7132
7139
7211
7212
7213
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7223
7224
7225
8111
8113
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
8114 ..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00284
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
315
671,532
2,130
3,900,891
0.05
23,897
15,652
49,298,948
36,586,403
2,063
2,338
1,105,731
715,353
0.19
0.33
12,833
4,402
16,220
22,491
75,874,312
11,949,232
39,798,676
62,683,511
5,913
2,715
2,454
2,787
1,482,804
783,080
1,363,070
917,797
0.40
0.35
0.18
0.30
2,115
4,587
8,774
932
4,204
296
3,752
3,342
1,972
2,773
26,019
2,399
1,078
181
1,259
2,856
61
178
1,150
15,224,604
16,632,694
45,327,608
7,466,268
10,143,593
3,898,123
42,559,048
5,943,802
3,129,421
25,002,454
112,901,810
7,136,600
2,523,921
743,227
6,361,525
34,194,636
567,155
641,408
2,051,773
7,199
3,626
5,166
8,009
2,413
13,148
11,344
1,778
1,587
9,018
4,339
2,975
2,342
4,112
5,055
11,975
9,272
3,603
1,785
5,734,418
1,610,062
1,037,261
7,794,296
1,807,749
4,474,249
2,963,924
1,306,752
1,663,607
1,245,244
671,194
1,533,830
3,245,312
3,879,488
2,114,365
4,338,191
7,096,235
3,148,365
1,184,543
0.13
0.23
0.50
0.10
0.13
0.29
0.38
0.14
0.10
0.72
0.65
0.19
0.07
0.11
0.24
0.28
0.13
0.11
0.15
1,020
7,124
1,184
7,538
5,517
5,985
799
326
1,021
290
58
10
6
3,125,752
15,777,099
2,055,225
16,396,965
15,448,753
13,236,859
6,631,683
1,639,918
21,196,909
2,399,519
3,146,213
1,136,474
408,435
3,063
2,215
1,736
2,175
2,800
2,212
8,303
5,023
20,756
8,280
54,588
118,967
64,547
1,475,233
471,098
994,278
1,557,548
1,107,348
610,067
3,531,393
2,880,366
1,947,504
2,122,696
31,988,544
26,840,059
24,345,151
0.21
0.47
0.17
0.14
0.25
0.36
0.24
0.17
1.07
0.39
0.17
0.44
0.27
377
454
15,692,040
12,424,041
41,623
27,345
7,737,051
2,746,969
0.54
1.00
779
13,425,442
17,232
2,104,725
0.82
136
2,496
480
3,155,732
39,826,256
5,254,947
23,216
15,956
10,949
2,165,006
1,571,030
2,633,784
1.07
1.02
0.42
172
2,687
4,679
2,011
4,046
2,119
4,469,310
51,565,482
5,483,031
2,409,683
5,398,753
2,111,109
25,964
19,189
1,172
1,198
1,334
996
2,335,393
676,561
1,560,279
2,328,568
2,099,056
1,445,877
1.11
2.84
0.08
0.05
0.06
0.07
15,342
3,845
1,742
1,000
34,659
17,375
2,543
687
14,460,165
6,836,964
3,288,557
2,273,300
51,264,046
32,853,003
2,405,045
741,076
942
1,778
1,888
2,272
1,479
1,891
946
1,079
835,413
2,394,793
1,040,189
5,012,918
1,051,729
2,184,689
991,813
930,215
0.11
0.07
0.18
0.05
0.14
0.09
0.10
0.12
7,295
14,383
157,253
62,789
8,982
8,312,585
13,061,680
276,972,590
100,273,474
14,997,313
1,139
908
1,761
1,597
1,670
857,031
663,521
1,144,923
798,630
1,261,858
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.20
0.13
9,417
11,449,589
1,216
455,661
0.27
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70981
TABLE VIII.F.4—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
8121
8122
8123
8129
8131
8132
8133
8134
8139
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Industry
Entities
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
52,932
6,955
13,051
16,792
83,837
7,839
6,903
11,030
25,710
64,529,881
13,214,986
16,733,433
22,209,398
126,171,312
8,889,289
8,993,435
15,706,906
33,664,444
1,219
1,900
1,282
1,323
1,505
1,134
1,303
1,424
1,309
346,123
1,130,650
564,862
509,230
722,894
3,473,007
1,442,084
697,379
1,384,987
0.35
0.17
0.23
0.26
0.21
0.03
0.09
0.20
0.09
9993 ..................
Personal Care Services ......................................................
Death Care Services ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Laundry Services .....................................
Other Personal Services .....................................................
Religious Organizations ......................................................
Grantmaking and Giving Services ......................................
Social Advocacy Organizations ...........................................
Civic and Social Organizations ...........................................
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and Similar Organizations.
Local Government ...............................................................
4,846
132,114,558
27,261
17,292,921
0.16
Total ...........
..............................................................................................
1,985,235
3,863,384,856
1,946
2,403,819
0.08
Source: OSHA.
TABLE VIII.F.5—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
NAICS
1111
1112
1113
1114
1119
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1129
1131
1132
1133
1141
1142
1151
1152
1153
2111
2131
2211
2212
2213
2361
2362
2371
2372
2373
2379
2381
2382
2383
2389
3111
3112
3113
3114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3121
3122
3131
3132
3133
3141
3149
3151
3152
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Entities
Oilseed and Grain Farming .................................................
Vegetable and Melon Farming ............................................
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming ................................................
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production ............
Other Crop Farming ............................................................
Cattle Ranching and Farming .............................................
Hog and Pig Farming ..........................................................
Poultry and Egg Production ................................................
Sheep and Goat Farming ....................................................
Aquaculture .........................................................................
Other Animal Production .....................................................
Timber Tract Operations .....................................................
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products ...........
Logging ................................................................................
Fishing .................................................................................
Hunting and Trapping ..........................................................
Support Activities for Crop Production ................................
Support Activities for Animal Production .............................
Support Activities for Forestry .............................................
Oil and Gas Extraction ........................................................
Support Activities for Mining ...............................................
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution
Natural Gas Distribution ......................................................
Water, Sewage and Other Systems ...................................
Residential Building Construction .......................................
Nonresidential Building Construction ..................................
Utility System Construction .................................................
Land Subdivision .................................................................
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction ..........................
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction ...............
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors ..
Building Equipment Contractors ..........................................
Building Finishing Contractors ............................................
Other Specialty Trade Contractors .....................................
Animal Food Manufacturing ................................................
Grain and Oilseed Milling ....................................................
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing ...............
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing ...............................................
Animal Slaughtering and Processing ..................................
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging .....................
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing ...................................
Other Food Manufacturing ..................................................
Beverage Manufacturing .....................................................
Tobacco Manufacturing .......................................................
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills .............................................
Fabric Mills ..........................................................................
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating Mills ........
Textile Furnishings Mills ......................................................
Other Textile Product Mills ..................................................
Apparel Knitting Mills ...........................................................
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing ..................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00285
Fmt 4701
Total
annualized
costs
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
$7,184
1,227
3,060
1,545
5,537
10,474
585
1,356
856
91
2,806
429
144
7,530
2,416
331
4,102
4,531
1,534
4,571
8,845
832
267
3,468
167,394
34,810
13,929
4,615
6,251
3,581
83,470
161,684
108,028
62,342
377
130
652
441
$6,027,437
3,233,900
4,119,361
4,149,308
6,434,964
11,742,592
921,175
2,018,022
968,612
239,911
3,272,814
403,940
104,419
6,292,246
1,100,212
292,626
3,213,003
2,962,939
1,037,673
6,341,178
14,462,495
2,254,730
546,792
5,937,995
90,561,837
32,498,908
14,564,718
2,626,758
5,486,633
3,418,173
72,226,262
141,354,524
74,449,281
43,480,559
349,776
273,983
541,708
532,718
$839
2,636
1,346
2,686
1,162
1,121
1,575
1,488
1,131
2,630
1,166
942
725
836
455
885
783
654
676
1,387
1,635
2,709
2,049
1,712
541
934
1,046
569
878
954
865
874
689
697
928
2,115
831
1,207
$609,184
705,291
384,931
513,448
198,860
523,461
2,022,974
2,264,037
59,994
875,290
88,841
1,293,445
679,386
1,170,494
667,346
619,029
1,530,220
405,439
765,904
2,574,156
937,066
13,316,386
10,690,728
850,747
1,043,976
2,948,013
1,657,874
1,167,179
2,619,746
1,444,677
936,942
847,521
653,438
1,039,609
5,316,620
22,940,721
1,163,232
3,760,308
0.14
0.37
0.35
0.52
0.58
0.21
0.08
0.07
1.89
0.30
1.31
0.07
0.11
0.07
0.07
0.14
0.05
0.16
0.09
0.05
0.17
0.02
0.02
0.20
0.05
0.03
0.06
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.07
0.02
0.01
0.07
0.03
337
996
129
4,379
1,111
3,429
32
60
192
263
630
1,705
54
2,095
456,581
872,620
107,828
4,017,779
1,075,034
2,263,370
42,411
75,096
233,984
271,517
573,335
1,270,778
66,320
1,429,596
1,353
876
838
918
968
660
1,311
1,254
1,217
1,031
910
745
1,228
682
9,285,097
2,401,951
3,136,053
635,675
2,724,529
1,398,536
6,587,893
2,191,371
3,435,732
1,915,018
780,741
614,109
1,443,320
637,842
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.14
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.05
0.12
0.12
0.09
0.11
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70982
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.5—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3159
3161
3162
3169
3211
3212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3219
3221
3222
3231
3241
3251
3252
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3253 ..................
3254 ..................
3255 ..................
3256 ..................
3259
3261
3262
3271
3272
3273
3274
3279
3311
3312
3313
3314
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3315
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3328 ..................
3329 ..................
3331 ..................
3332 ..................
3333 ..................
3334 ..................
3335 ..................
3336 ..................
3339
3341
3342
3343
3344
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
3345 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
3346 ..................
3351
3352
3353
3359
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3369
3371
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing .....
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing ............................
Footwear Manufacturing ......................................................
Other Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing ...............
Sawmills and Wood Preservation .......................................
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing.
Other Wood Product Manufacturing ...................................
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills .....................................
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing ............................
Printing and Related Support Activities ..............................
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing .....................
Basic Chemical Manufacturing ............................................
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing .....................
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing ......................
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing ...
Plastics Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Rubber Product Manufacturing ...........................................
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing .......................
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing ............................
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing ...................
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing .........................
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing .............
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing .............
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased Steel ...........
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing ...........
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production and
Processing.
Foundries .............................................................................
Forging and Stamping .........................................................
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing ..................................
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing .............
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing .........
Hardware Manufacturing .....................................................
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing .............................
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and
Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities ....
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing ..................
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing ....................................
Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing.
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial
Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing ..............................
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment
Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing .............
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing ..........
Communications Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing .......................
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Manufacturing and Reproducing Magnetic and Optical
Media.
Electric Lighting Equipment Manufacturing .........................
Household Appliance Manufacturing ..................................
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing ....................................
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing ..............................................
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing ..................
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing .....................................
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing .....................
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing .................................
Ship and Boat Building ........................................................
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing .................
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen Cabinet
Manufacturing.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00286
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
236
61
75
302
1,006
264
188,102
42,671
123,351
187,558
1,185,132
633,617
796
698
1,655
621
1,179
2,400
619,537
2,839,687
2,193,374
626,299
1,727,380
4,044,768
0.13
0.02
0.08
0.10
0.07
0.06
3,327
27
559
10,124
244
277
226
3,257,167
376,078
893,086
5,790,603
494,702
556,651
335,765
979
13,794
1,597
572
2,027
2,011
1,485
1,053,722
93,208,301
4,579,693
693,094
28,484,143
21,892,698
6,835,167
0.09
0.01
0.03
0.08
0.01
0.01
0.02
229
350,781
1,534
7,269,726
0.02
546
448
704
603,519
542,317
655,288
1,106
1,211
931
3,960,913
3,140,147
2,390,628
0.03
0.04
0.04
579
2,192
382
328
539
1,336
51
1,006
103
121
82
178
723,101
2,911,100
557,177
323,850
546,405
1,655,935
122,726
1,149,905
218,406
265,350
262,328
278,430
1,250
1,328
1,459
989
1,014
1,240
2,409
1,143
2,121
2,191
3,197
1,566
3,072,599
2,782,966
2,487,702
1,473,179
1,791,588
2,456,404
7,351,270
1,653,776
6,567,240
7,339,261
12,497,676
8,757,990
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
391
556
373
4,125
300
186
298
8,812
547,296
557,664
259,248
4,085,887
423,339
153,954
292,858
6,785,989
1,398
1,003
695
991
1,409
828
983
770
2,192,210
2,020,339
1,107,327
1,456,833
3,917,337
1,511,537
1,589,842
910,823
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.08
1,740
1,998
776
1,753,611
2,026,136
880,986
1,008
1,014
1,135
985,271
1,910,855
2,303,225
0.10
0.05
0.05
951
602
827,287
467,902
870
777
1,790,885
1,741,883
0.05
0.04
409
485,787
1,186
2,390,594
0.05
2,174
186
1,503,816
279,911
692
1,504
1,172,111
4,514,698
0.06
0.03
1,576
317
374
180
991
1,782,884
181,009
275,245
98,831
740,401
1,131
570
735
548
747
2,828,012
2,040,422
2,213,015
1,509,740
1,810,399
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
1,411
961,637
682
2,280,952
0.03
158
80,247
509
869,333
0.06
321
73
543
530
72
462
1,140
368
32
446
321
4,244
290,904
67,216
585,477
775,438
42,019
571,401
1,248,555
569,759
104,712
605,519
258,348
3,437,887
906
915
1,078
1,462
586
1,237
1,096
1,550
3,303
1,357
804
810
2,228,223
1,907,392
2,265,967
4,923,782
8,079,095
2,128,388
2,450,442
4,750,992
12,137,746
1,347,324
1,487,253
718,130
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.05
0.11
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70983
TABLE VIII.F.5—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
3372
3379
3391
3399
4231
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4232 ..................
4233 ..................
4234 ..................
4235 ..................
4236 ..................
4237 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4238 ..................
4239
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4249
4251
4411
4412
4413
4441
4442
4451
4452
4453
4491
4492
4551
4552
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4561
4571
4572
4581
4582
4583
4591
4592
4593
4594
4595
4599
4811
4812
4821
4831
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4832
4841
4842
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4859
4861
4862
4869
4871
4872
4879
4881
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing ............
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing .................
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing ................
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing ....................................
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers .....
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant
Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies
Merchant Wholesalers.
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic
Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers .......
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers ..............
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers ......
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers ........
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers ...........
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers ........
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers ................................
Automobile Dealers .............................................................
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers ...............................................
Automotive Parts, Accessories, and Tire Retailers ............
Building Material and Supplies Dealers ..............................
Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Retailers ........
Grocery and Convenience Retailers ...................................
Specialty Food Retailers .....................................................
Beer, Wine, and Liquor Retailers ........................................
Furniture and Home Furnishings Retailers .........................
Electronics and Appliance Retailers ...................................
Department Stores ..............................................................
Warehouse Clubs, Supercenters, and Other General Merchandise Retailers.
Health and Personal Care Retailers ...................................
Gasoline Stations ................................................................
Fuel Dealers ........................................................................
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Retailers ......................
Shoe Retailers .....................................................................
Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Retailers ...............
Sporting Goods, Hobby, and Musical Instrument Retailers
Book Retailers and News Dealers ......................................
Florists .................................................................................
Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Retailers ...................
Used Merchandise Retailers ...............................................
Other Miscellaneous Retailers ............................................
Scheduled Air Transportation ..............................................
Nonscheduled Air Transportation ........................................
Rail Transportation ..............................................................
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation ................................................
General Freight Trucking ....................................................
Specialized Freight Trucking ...............................................
Urban Transit Systems ........................................................
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation ...........................
Taxi and Limousine Service ................................................
School and Employee Bus Transportation .........................
Charter Bus Industry ...........................................................
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation ........
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil ...................................
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas ...............................
Other Pipeline Transportation .............................................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land ....................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water ..................
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other ...................
Support Activities for Air Transportation .............................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00287
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
1,162
216
3,950
7,399
1,257
1,046,524
288,388
2,735,349
5,215,239
4,993,354
901
1,337
693
705
3,973
1,149,394
2,340,433
758,887
801,390
3,303,747
0.08
0.06
0.09
0.09
0.12
910
785
3,110,498
2,505,110
3,417
3,193
2,854,446
3,557,039
0.12
0.09
1,916
5,577,568
2,912
2,405,983
0.12
556
2,106,984
3,790
6,228,340
0.06
1,576
5,580,492
3,542
3,369,434
0.11
816
2,636,524
3,230
2,796,763
0.12
3,312
15,267,247
4,610
2,896,468
0.16
2,551
610
563
1,248
2,242
266
676
263
243
6,358,104
2,004,758
1,888,913
3,098,845
7,359,247
1,240,969
2,375,082
1,242,062
763,626
2,492
3,287
3,356
2,483
3,283
4,671
3,516
4,718
3,147
2,832,277
2,995,604
4,020,123
2,808,295
4,893,717
11,316,686
5,030,093
20,772,751
3,176,806
0.09
0.11
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.04
0.07
0.02
0.10
1,870
3,577
4,702
1,853
4,859
5,693
2,502
10,521
3,551
5,163
6,010
3,217
148
2,556
6,010,140
7,395,194
9,420,631
4,518,777
11,159,040
7,059,545
5,016,485
16,794,972
5,729,397
5,975,343
8,962,736
4,908,069
190,770
3,419,681
3,215
2,068
2,004
2,439
2,297
1,240
2,005
1,596
1,613
1,157
1,491
1,525
1,287
1,338
2,900,974
8,758,811
3,255,236
2,697,277
1,134,410
1,614,974
1,498,082
1,054,320
900,891
1,325,671
1,223,523
1,030,417
1,621,586
842,471
0.11
0.02
0.06
0.09
0.20
0.08
0.13
0.15
0.18
0.09
0.12
0.15
0.08
0.16
7,776
10,327
649
5,967
1,010
2,976
5,150
774
2,213
3,317
2,352
5,911
278
1,285
96
455
9,533,570
15,498,593
1,060,755
8,712,135
1,421,801
3,898,966
7,074,290
988,633
3,540,277
4,621,207
3,240,613
8,732,908
293,355
1,286,819
51,361
544,184
1,226
1,501
1,635
1,460
1,408
1,310
1,374
1,278
1,600
1,393
1,378
1,477
1,054
1,001
536
1,196
1,791,759
2,804,858
2,693,189
698,207
1,020,151
1,079,268
864,136
744,295
494,498
627,443
608,402
1,042,423
3,080,504
2,040,509
399,619
2,200,414
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.21
0.14
0.12
0.16
0.17
0.32
0.22
0.23
0.14
0.03
0.05
0.13
0.05
323
51,643
35,020
373
332
5,931
1,444
663
3,097
27
59
29
474
1,385
208
2,961
453,643
37,499,799
26,650,522
312,637
422,567
6,596,898
1,578,496
764,143
2,381,262
34,499
90,847
37,586
570,363
2,109,958
272,900
3,481,748
1,403
726
761
839
1,274
1,112
1,093
1,152
769
1,282
1,528
1,288
1,203
1,524
1,311
1,176
1,350,810
861,013
892,912
839,880
833,268
473,725
381,438
976,121
514,988
5,687,521
15,269,599
4,867,763
670,486
589,761
812,572
1,058,641
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.15
0.23
0.29
0.12
0.15
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.18
0.26
0.16
0.11
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70984
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.5—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
4882
4883
4884
4885
4889
4921
4922
4931
5121
5122
5131
5132
5161
5162
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5171
5174
5178
5182
..................
..................
..................
..................
5192 ..................
5221
5222
5223
5231
..................
..................
..................
..................
5232
5239
5241
5242
..................
..................
..................
..................
5251
5259
5311
5312
5313
5321
5322
5323
5324
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
5331 ..................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
5411 ..................
5412 ..................
5413
5414
5415
5416
..................
..................
..................
..................
5417
5418
5419
5511
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5619
5621
5622
5629
6111
6112
6113
6114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
6115
6116
6117
6211
6212
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Industry
Support Activities for Rail Transportation ...........................
Support Activities for Water Transportation ........................
Support Activities for Road Transportation .........................
Freight Transportation Arrangement ...................................
Other Support Activities for Transportation .........................
Couriers and Express Delivery Services ............................
Local Messengers and Local Delivery ................................
Warehousing and Storage ..................................................
Motion Picture and Video Industries ...................................
Sound Recording Industries ................................................
Newspaper, Periodical, Book, and Directory Publishers ....
Software Publishers ............................................................
Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations ......................
Media Streaming Distribution Services, Social Networks,
and Other Media Networks and Content Providers.
Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite)
Satellite Telecommunications ..............................................
All Other Telecommunications ............................................
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing,
Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and Other Information Services.
Depository Credit Intermediation .........................................
Nondepository Credit Intermediation ...................................
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation ..........................
Securities and Commodity Contracts Intermediation and
Brokerage.
Securities and Commodity Exchanges ...............................
Other Financial Investment Activities ..................................
Insurance Carriers ...............................................................
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds .............................
Other Investment Pools and Funds ....................................
Lessors of Real Estate ........................................................
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers ........................
Activities Related to Real Estate .........................................
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing ........................
Consumer Goods Rental .....................................................
General Rental Centers ......................................................
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment
Rental and Leasing.
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services .....................................................................
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll
Services.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services ..............
Specialized Design Services ...............................................
Computer Systems Design and Related Services ..............
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services .................
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services ..........
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services ......
Management of Companies and Enterprises .....................
Office Administrative Services ............................................
Facilities Support Services ..................................................
Employment Services ..........................................................
Business Support Services .................................................
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services ..................
Investigation and Security Services ....................................
Services to Buildings and Dwellings ...................................
Other Support Services .......................................................
Waste Collection .................................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ...........................................
Remediation and Other Waste Management Services ......
Elementary and Secondary Schools ...................................
Junior Colleges ....................................................................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools ...............
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools .............................................
Other Schools and Instruction .............................................
Educational Support Services .............................................
Offices of Physicians ...........................................................
Offices of Dentists ...............................................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Frm 00288
Fmt 4701
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
315
1,396
8,222
11,283
1,202
3,125
2,990
3,555
2,383
445
1,936
1,057
370
235
430,553
1,914,888
6,121,945
15,674,157
1,095,829
2,811,195
2,455,403
3,599,514
4,673,631
780,716
4,503,697
2,023,518
1,470,235
560,991
1,366
1,372
745
1,389
912
900
821
1,012
1,962
1,754
2,326
1,915
3,969
2,388
1,603,240
1,256,551
687,092
1,583,872
799,155
843,986
741,162
1,301,304
903,851
660,025
816,692
1,268,517
662,207
1,346,479
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.09
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.08
0.22
0.27
0.28
0.15
0.60
0.18
942
40
287
1,112
1,900,994
86,847
502,736
2,196,650
2,018
2,157
1,753
1,976
1,249,302
1,745,466
1,126,736
1,171,961
0.16
0.12
0.16
0.17
468
867,704
1,853
507,510
0.37
637
1,654
1,718
1,349
1,709,643
3,919,691
3,212,716
2,298,865
2,682
2,369
1,870
1,704
1,711,700
1,191,143
758,941
1,235,568
0.16
0.20
0.25
0.14
0
6,852
499
17,366
19,633
11,878,438
1,011,256
34,184,872
39,745
1,734
2,025
1,968
753,808,884
1,247,480
3,600,269
575,155
0.01
0.14
0.06
0.34
197
112
12,961
14,379
10,077
482
1,039
284
949
166,858
200,679
26,616,095
25,261,103
22,407,861
1,447,641
3,003,692
865,973
2,282,588
849
1,786
2,054
1,757
2,224
3,004
2,891
3,049
2,404
198,788
1,085,641
1,090,656
700,221
584,901
1,018,247
609,218
969,539
1,447,107
0.43
0.16
0.19
0.25
0.38
0.29
0.47
0.31
0.17
285
476,238
1,669
3,054,162
0.05
22,852
14,754
45,807,442
29,735,652
2,005
2,015
747,237
425,212
0.27
0.47
11,568
4,322
15,074
21,484
42,680,149
10,844,535
30,869,789
48,439,074
3,690
2,509
2,048
2,255
796,165
651,156
699,158
605,529
0.46
0.39
0.29
0.37
1,662
4,240
8,042
622
3,518
157
2,522
2,939
1,846
2,305
24,202
2,194
893
140
1,086
1,169
29
119
1,062
4,503,806
11,597,282
31,055,715
1,694,619
5,423,804
441,128
4,435,122
3,932,901
2,452,247
7,402,537
62,022,534
4,403,819
1,162,660
316,092
3,133,580
3,475,761
111,992
231,971
1,591,435
2,709
2,735
3,862
2,724
1,542
2,817
1,758
1,338
1,328
3,212
2,563
2,007
1,301
2,251
2,885
2,973
3,817
1,952
1,498
1,184,901
972,915
718,191
2,000,475
785,494
1,344,810
862,254
637,724
1,145,290
568,222
441,221
960,942
1,262,504
1,725,940
1,098,195
637,302
2,336,262
1,512,355
755,854
0.23
0.28
0.54
0.14
0.20
0.21
0.20
0.21
0.12
0.57
0.58
0.21
0.10
0.13
0.26
0.47
0.16
0.13
0.20
841
6,476
1,096
6,908
5,290
1,646,426
11,488,813
1,574,151
12,269,746
13,513,854
1,959
1,774
1,437
1,776
2,555
687,422
332,175
604,768
960,870
948,924
0.28
0.53
0.24
0.18
0.27
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70985
TABLE VIII.F.5—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON VERY SMALL ENTITIES AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED STANDARD WITH COSTS
CALCULATED USING A 2% DISCOUNT RATE—Continued
NAICS
6213
6214
6215
6216
6219
6221
6222
6223
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Industry
9993 ..................
Offices of Other Health Practitioners ..................................
Outpatient Care Centers .....................................................
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories ..................................
Home Health Care Services ...............................................
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services .............................
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals .............................
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ......................
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities) .............
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability,
Mental Health, and Substance Abuse Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted
Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities ........................................
Individual and Family Services ...........................................
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency and Other
Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services ......................................
Child Care Services ............................................................
Performing Arts Companies ................................................
Spectator Sports ..................................................................
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers,
and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers .....................
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions ............
Amusement Parks and Arcades .........................................
Gambling Industries ............................................................
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries .....................
Traveler Accommodation ....................................................
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers’ Camps.
Special Food Services ........................................................
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) ...............................
Restaurants and Other Eating Places ................................
Automotive Repair and Maintenance ..................................
Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance.
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance
Personal Care Services ......................................................
Death Care Services ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Laundry Services .....................................
Other Personal Services .....................................................
Religious Organizations ......................................................
Grantmaking and Giving Services ......................................
Social Advocacy Organizations ...........................................
Civic and Social Organizations ...........................................
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and Similar Organizations.
Local Government ...............................................................
Total ...........
..............................................................................................
6231 ..................
6232 ..................
6233 ..................
6239 ..................
6241 ..................
6242 ..................
6243
6244
7111
7112
7113
7114
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7115
7121
7131
7132
7139
7211
7212
7213
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7223
7224
7225
8111
8112
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
8113 ..................
8114
8121
8122
8123
8129
8131
8132
8133
8134
8139
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Average
annualized
cost per
entity
Total
annualized
costs
Entities
Average
revenue per
entity
Costs as %
of revenue
5,695
536
265
653
209
4
1
2
10,110,019
1,544,461
717,035
2,917,046
655,184
20,164
60,072
89,129
1,775
2,879
2,703
4,468
3,137
5,297
40,967
45,058
447,256
989,325
1,182,302
518,702
797,038
10,704,238
15,140,669
23,112,360
0.40
0.29
0.23
0.86
0.39
0.05
0.27
0.19
97
246
299,181
1,184,615
3,092
4,820
1,138,055
495,389
0.27
0.97
523
2,224,552
4,252
439,078
0.97
83
1,805
334
513,007
7,386,994
1,555,480
6,216
4,092
4,659
469,247
424,361
990,632
1.32
0.96
0.47
81
2,132
4,171
1,794
3,604
2,047
345,131
20,144,880
4,129,821
1,430,879
3,665,186
2,033,576
4,262
9,448
990
797
1,017
993
566,673
290,434
787,860
1,258,295
1,122,492
1,093,566
0.75
3.25
0.13
0.06
0.09
0.09
15,202
3,149
1,354
744
28,297
12,993
2,293
654
14,251,524
3,311,160
1,316,414
922,020
22,821,999
15,574,139
1,620,981
651,616
937
1,051
972
1,239
807
1,199
707
996
787,943
608,424
516,918
1,354,532
483,584
877,297
721,900
650,782
0.12
0.17
0.19
0.09
0.17
0.14
0.10
0.15
6,293
12,801
117,267
64,015
4,843
4,826,527
9,231,321
109,738,307
85,582,777
7,081,340
767
721
936
1,337
1,462
453,753
450,393
537,890
646,006
555,490
0.17
0.16
0.17
0.21
0.26
8,375
11,158,572
1,332
842,857
0.16
9,205
50,363
6,418
12,190
15,818
76,718
7,573
6,199
10,249
23,841
10,159,719
59,103,771
9,445,610
12,520,561
15,920,372
98,017,873
8,483,782
6,958,994
12,512,391
28,061,383
1,104
1,174
1,472
1,027
1,006
1,278
1,120
1,123
1,221
1,177
380,439
267,441
854,725
353,835
339,338
417,227
2,705,446
816,788
479,271
819,457
0.29
0.44
0.17
0.29
0.30
0.31
0.04
0.14
0.25
0.14
1,922
4,052,837
2,109
1,111,959
0.19
1,847,745
2,177,399,776
1,178
987,455
0.12
Source: OSHA.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
F. Federal Rules Which May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rule
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
requires that the agency’s initial
regulatory flexibility Analysis identify,
‘‘to the extent practicable, . . . all
relevant Federal rules which may
duplicate, overlap or conflict with the
proposed rule’’ (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(5)).
Below, OSHA discusses whether the
rules it has identified would duplicate,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
overlap, or conflict with the options for
a potential standard as outlined above.
While some Federal rules may have
overlapping requirements, OSHA did
not identify any rules that would
conflict with the proposed standard.
The agency therefore believes that no
Federal rules would prevent compliance
with the proposed standard.
I. Other Federal Agency Rules
The first Federal rules that OSHA
identified are regulations promulgated
PO 00000
Frm 00289
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
(7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). The Worker
Protection Standard (WPS) (40 CFR part
170) is designed to protect agricultural
workers from ‘‘unreasonable adverse
effects of pesticides’’ (80 FR 67496);
however, there are some provisions of
the WPS addressing heat hazards
associated with PPE use required by that
standard. The WPS requires that
employers implement ‘‘appropriate’’ or
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70986
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
‘‘sufficient’’ measures to prevent heatrelated illness when workers must wear
PPE (40 CFR 170.507, 170.605). The
WPS also requires employers to ensure
pesticide handlers are trained on how to
recognize, prevent, and provide first aid
treatment for heat-related illnesses (40
CFR 170.501). Although there may be
some overlap between these
requirements and some elements of the
proposed standard (e.g., training),
OSHA is not aware of any conflicts.
OSHA’s proposed standard would be
entirely consistent with EPA’s
requirements around PPE
considerations and training for pesticide
handlers. Additionally, the WPS,
designed to protect workers from
pesticide exposure, does not obviate the
need for OSHA’s proposed standard,
designed to protect workers from
hazardous heat. A multitude of factors,
including PPE, can contribute to heat
injury and illness.
The second set of Federal rules that
OSHA identified are Department of
Transportation (DOT) regulations. The
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) requires
drivers of vehicles with gross vehicle
weight ratings of 26,001 pounds or more
to be instructed about extreme driving
conditions, including high heat, to
obtain commercial driver’s licenses (49
CFR part 380). FMCSA’s regulations
might overlap with OSHA’s proposed
rule to the extent they require some
training for a limited group of
individuals. However, these regulations
would not conflict with OSHA’s
proposed rule, nor do they obviate the
need for a comprehensive OSHA
standard with provisions specifically
designed to protect workers exposed to
a broad range of hazardous heat
conditions.
II. OSHA Standards
OSHA does not have any standards
that specifically address workplace
exposure to hazardous heat. However,
OSHA has identified some current
standards applicable to some issues
related to hazardous heat. These
standards, described below, do not
conflict with the proposed rule, nor do
they obviate the need for an OSHA
standard addressing occupational
exposure to hazardous heat.
The first set of standards OSHA
identified are the sanitation standards
(29 CFR 1910.141, 1926.51, 1915.88,
1917.127, 1918.95, 1928.110). Among
other things, these standards require
employers to provide employees with
readily accessible potable drinking
water and access to toilet facilities. The
field sanitation standard for agriculture
also requires employers to notify
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
employees of the location of water and
the importance of drinking water
frequently, especially on hot days (29
CFR 1928.110(c)(4)). These existing
standards and the provisions of the
proposed rule do not conflict, nor do
these existing standards obviate the
need for a heat-specific standard. While
OSHA’s sanitation standards require
employers to make drinking water
available to employees, their primary
purpose is to ensure sanitary conditions
in the workplace and they do not
include the same level of specificity for
provision of water as the proposed
standard (e.g., specific quantity of water
to be provided).
The second set of standards OSHA
has identified are specific to pulp and
paper and textile mills. These standards
require that exposed water pipes that
carry either steam or hot water and are
located close to working platforms be
guarded to prevent contact (29 CFR
1910.261(k)(11), 1910.262). These
standards are primarily concerned with
burn and scalding-related hazards to
employees. However, when employers
guard these pipes by using insulating
material, they may also help protect
their workplace from increases in
temperatures that may, in some cases,
induce HRIs. Thus, the existing
standards and the proposed standard
would be complementary in nature.
The third set of standards that OSHA
has identified are two broadly
applicable standards that may apply to
some heat-related hazards—the
Recordkeeping standard (29 CFR
1904.7) and the Safety Training and
Education standard for construction (29
CFR 1926.21). OSHA’s Recordkeeping
standard requires employers to record
and report injuries and illnesses,
including heat-related injuries and
illnesses, that meet recording criteria.
This proposed standard does not
include additional requirements for
recording and reporting injuries and
illnesses and therefore does not
duplicate or conflict with 29 CFR
1904.7. OSHA’s Safety Training and
Education standard requires employers
in the construction industry to train
employees in the recognition,
avoidance, and prevention of unsafe
conditions in their workplaces.
However, the standard does not
specifically identify hazardous heat as a
hazard for which workers need training,
nor does it establish heat-specific
training requirements.
These standards might, in some cases,
overlap with some of the provisions of
the proposed standard. However, they
do not duplicate or conflict with the
proposed standard. OSHA believes that
a comprehensive standard addressing
PO 00000
Frm 00290
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
HRIs is necessary to ensure that all
employers take all appropriate measures
to protect workers from the hazards
associated with exposure to hazardous
heat. If specific requirements of any
final heat standard were to directly
overlap with more general requirements
in other existing standards, the specific
requirements would apply in lieu of the
more general requirements, unless
otherwise noted (see 29 CFR
1910.5(c)(1)); see also the discussion of
the continued applicability of the
sanitation standards in the Explanation
of Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(e)(2), Drinking Water).
G. Alternatives and Regulatory Options
to the Proposed Rule
This section presents regulatory
alternatives and options to the proposed
OSHA Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention standard and OSHA’s
responses to the findings and
recommendations of the SBAR panel.
Under the RFA, a regulatory
alternative is one that would
accomplish the stated objectives of the
proposed standard and that would
minimize or reduce economic impact of
the proposed rule on small entities. A
regulatory alternative can reduce the
impact on businesses of all sizes, and it
need not focus solely on small entities.
OSHA also presents regulatory options.
Regulatory options would increase the
burden of compliance on affected
entities and therefore do not meet the
definition of a regulatory alternative set
out in the RFA. Nevertheless, the agency
presents them in this section to provide
notice of potential alternate approaches
and to solicit comment on these options.
Table VIII.F.1. presents these options
and alternatives. The assumptions and
parameters for estimating the impact of
these options and alternatives is
discussed below the table.
OMB Circular A–4 (2023) directs
agencies, for purposes of complying
with E.O. 12866, to identify key
attributes or provisions of a proposed
standard and examine options for each
‘‘including: the proposed or finalized
option; at least one option that achieves
additional benefits (and presumably
costs more due to, for example, greater
stringency); and at least one option that
costs less (and presumably generates
fewer benefits due to, for example, less
stringency).’’ For this proposed
standard, OSHA identified requirements
for rest breaks and for written HIIPPs as
the key provisions for purposes of its
E.O. 12866 analysis. The requirements
of the proposed standard work in
concert to produce the benefit of
avoided HRIs and fatalities. The agency
is unable to directly attribute avoided
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
HRIs and fatalities to any specific
provision so is unable to discuss the
differences in the benefits of alternatives
other than based on the assumption that
more stringent options might increase
benefits while less stringent alternatives
might decrease benefits.
As shown in table VIII.F.6. an option
to require high heat triggered rest breaks
every hour, is the costliest, incurring an
additional $23.0 billion annually
compared to the proposed requirement
of rest breaks every two hours. The
alternative that would reduce the
70987
compliance costs the most would be one
that required 10-minute high heat
triggered rest breaks (versus the 15minute rest breaks required in the
proposed standard), which results in
approximately $3.2 billion less in
compliance costs per year.
TABLE VIII.F.6—COSTS FOR REGULATORY OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES
[2023$]
In-scope
entities
Description
Proposed standard as written ...................................................................
Review HIIPP at least every other year instead of at least annually .......
No written HIIPP required for <20 employees instead of <10 employees
All establishments write HIIPP regardless of number of employees .......
At or above the high heat trigger, 15-minute rest break at least every
hour instead of at least every two hours ...............................................
At or above the high heat trigger, 10-minute rest break at least every
two hours instead of 15-minute rest break at least every two hours ...
Refresher trainings at least every other year instead of annually ............
High heat trigger of 95° heat index instead of 90° heat index .................
Acclimatization for employees returning after 30 days away from work,
instead of after 14 days away from work ..............................................
Limit the sedentary work exemption to sedentary work activities at indoor work areas below [a heat index of 90 °F] .....................................
Add a requirement for employers to provide medical surveillance ..........
In-scope
establishments
In-scope
employees
Annualized costs
(2%)
Difference
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,535,774
2,535,774
2,535,774
2,535,774
35,954,325
35,954,325
35,954,325
35,954,325
$7,823,661,638
7,737,630,422
7,821,535,276
7,839,027,706
$0
¥86,031,216
¥2,126,362
15,366,068
2,230,750
2,535,774
35,954,325
30,821,032,888
22,997,371,249
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,535,774
2,535,774
2,535,774
35,954,325
35,954,325
35,954,325
4,601,335,411
7,585,132,580
5,967,548,421
¥3,222,326,227
¥238,529,059
¥1,856,113,217
2,230,750
2,535,774
35,954,325
7,822,809,795
¥851,843
2,230,750
2,230,750
2,535,774
2,535,774
35,954,325
35,954,325
7,824,928,699
10,301,080,493
1,267,060
2,477,418,855
Source: OSHA.
I. Regulatory Options
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. Regulatory Option 1—All
Establishments Write HIIPPs Regardless
of Number of Employees
This alternative assumes that all
establishments have their HIIPP in
writing compared to the proposed
standard where establishments with ten
or fewer employees do not need to have
their HIIPP in writing. All
establishments with ten or fewer
employees that do not have an existing
HIIPP in place are modeled as either
using OSHA’s template (six hours of a
designated person’s labor time) or
writing their HIIPP from scratch (30
hours) in the same proportions that
were assumed for establishments of
other sizes.
This regulatory option would add
about $15.4 million in additional costs.
OSHA believes that having a written
plan is an important tool in protecting
employees from heat and other
workplace hazards. However,
experience has shown that for the
smallest employers, employees and
supervisors or owners are working
closely enough together that the details
of safety plans can be readily
communicated between individuals.
The agency believes that written plans
are not necessary for employers with 10
or fewer employees and that this is a
useful way to reduce the burden on the
smallest employers (although they
would still need to have a HIIPP as
required by this proposed standard).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
b. Regulatory Option 2—At or Above the
High Heat Trigger 15-Minute Rest Break
at Least Every Hour
The proposed standard would require
employers to provide a 15-minute rest
break at least every two hours when the
high heat trigger is met. This option
would require employers to instead
provide a 15-minute rest break to their
at-risk employees at least every hour
where the high heat trigger is met. As
such, the cost for rest breaks would be
incurred six times during an 8-hour
work shift where the high heat trigger is
met (excluding rest breaks before lunch
and at the end of the workday).
This option would add considerable
costs to this proposed standard—nearly
$23.0 billion. As discussed throughout
this preamble, OSHA believes that rest
breaks are a crucial tool to protect
employees from heat injury and illness.
As discussed in Section VII.F.,
Paragraph (f) Requirements at or above
the High Heat Trigger, at the high heat
trigger, evidence supports providing 15minute rest breaks where employees are
provided with shade, water, and a
chance to shed PPE in order to reduce
their body temperature every two hours.
c. Regulatory Option 3—Upper Bound
Heat Index for Sedentary Work
Exemption
When calculating the costs of
requirements under the high heat
trigger, this alternative leaves in-scope
those employees who are considered
sedentary but who work in non-climatecontrolled indoor work conditions
PO 00000
Frm 00291
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
where temperatures are reasonably
expected to meet or exceed the high
heat trigger (i.e., a heat index of 90 °F).
This scope change results in more
employees qualifying for high heat
trigger rest breaks and requiring more
observation time from designated
persons. This option is estimated to
increase the costs of the proposed
standard by about $1.27 million.
d. Regulatory Option 4—Medical
Surveillance
Under the medical surveillance
alternative, OSHA adds a requirement
that all at-risk employees receive and
complete a medical screening
questionnaire to determine whether an
employee may be predisposed to heatrelated health risks. This questionnaire
is assumed to take 15 minutes. All atrisk employees are assumed to take this
questionnaire in the first year. Only new
employees (as determined by using the
annual hire rates for each sector) are
modeled to take this questionnaire in
subsequent years.
OSHA also assumes that employees
screened as having a predisposition to
heat-related health risks (assumed to be
23 percent of all at-risk employees)
undergo a medical examination. This
medical examination would take one
hour of an at-risk worker’s labor time.
The cost of the medical examination
itself, which the employer would need
to cover at no cost to the employee, is
estimated to cost $501.28.
Based on these assumptions, this
option would increase the costs of the
proposed standard by about $2.5 billion.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70988
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
The proposed standard currently
includes a suite of controls that OSHA
has preliminarily determined would
confer a high level of protection to all
workers, irrespective of individual risk
factors.
II. Alternatives
a. Alternative 1—Review HIIPP at Least
Every Other Year
Under this regulatory alternative,
establishments would need to review
their HIIPP at least every other year
instead of at least annually. Therefore,
OSHA assumes that costs would be
incurred every other year including both
a designated person’s time and the time
of employees involved in the plan
review and update as estimated in
Section VIII.C., Costs of Compliance.
As shown in table VIII.F.6., this
alternative would reduce the cost of the
proposed standard by about $86 million.
OSHA believes it is important that the
written program be reviewed and
updated annually to ensure that any
deficiencies are identified and remedied
promptly. This also maintains
consistency with other OSHA standards
that require annual program review and
update.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
b. Alternative 2—No Written HIIPP
Required for Establishments With <20
Employees
This alternative adjusts the number of
establishments that do not need to have
their HIIPP in writing from
establishments with ten or fewer
employees to those with 20 or fewer
employees and would reduce the cost of
the proposed standard by about $2.1
million.
As discussed above, OSHA believes
that the smallest employers can
effectively administer a program that is
not written. However, the agency
believes that this is less effective for a
slightly larger employer and, given the
fact that employers with between 10 and
20 employees represents a
proportionately large group of covered
employers, OSHA believes there are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
benefits to requiring a written program
for this group of employers.
c. Alternative 3—10-Minute Rest Breaks
at the High Heat Trigger
This alternative revises the rest break
requirements at the high heat trigger to
require 10-minute rest breaks every two
hours rather than 15-minute rest breaks.
The time to walk to and from rest areas
are maintained at two minutes for
indoor employees and four minutes for
outdoor employees.
This alternative reduces the cost of
the proposed standard by about $3.2
billion. OSHA has proposed 15-minute
rest breaks based on the available
literature on rest break efficacy (see
Section VII.F., Paragraph (f)
Requirements at or above the High Heat
Trigger).
d. Alternative 4—Refresher Trainings at
Least Every Other Year
Instead of annual refresher trainings,
this alternative assumes refresher
trainings take place every other year for
both at-risk employees and designated
persons. This alternative would reduce
the cost of the proposed standard by
about $238.5 million. Training is a
highly effective method to protect
workers from workplace hazards and
regular refresher training is necessary to
reinforce the topics of the training.
Training must be frequent enough that
employees maintain the knowledge
necessary to recognize heat-related
hazards and to understand and comply
with the employer’s HIIPP. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that annual
training is necessary for employees to
maintain the requisite knowledge and
that it is particularly important for
outdoor workers to receive this training
before the start of each heat season.
e. Alternative 5—95-Degree High Heat
Trigger
The high heat trigger is increased
from 90 degrees to 95 degrees under this
alternative. Revising the high heat
trigger upward results in fewer hours for
which establishments need to
PO 00000
Frm 00292
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
implement required procedures under
these high heat conditions and, thus,
results in lower costs.
As shown in table VIII.F.6., this
alternative would reduce costs by about
$1.9 billion (although this is a highly
uncertain estimate). However, OSHA
has preliminarily determined that a high
heat trigger of a heat index of 90 °F
would be highly protective and higher
triggers may not be adequate for
preventing HRIs (see Section V.B., Basis
for Initial and High Heat Triggers).
f. Alternative 6—Acclimatization for
Employees Returning After 30 Days
Away
The amount of time away from work
that qualifies an employee as a returning
employee is adjusted from 14 days to 30
days under this alternative. While
OSHA assumes that two percent of all
employees would qualify as returning
employees given the 14-day qualifying
period, the agency assumes half a
percent of employees would qualify
with a 30-day period.
OSHA estimates that this alternative
would reduce the cost of the proposed
standard by about $850,000. Again, this
is a highly uncertain estimate given the
lack of data on the number of workers
who are away from work for two weeks
and those away for 30 days during heat
season. This affects a small population,
and OSHA has proposed the more
protective approach of requiring
acclimatization for workers who have
been away for 14 consecutive days.
Are there additional burden reducing
alternatives that the agency should
include that would impact costs to
entities? If so, what burden reducing
alternatives would be most useful to
assess these impacts on entities? The
agency would welcome any suggestions
in this area.
H. SBAR Panel Recommendations
Table VIII.F.7. lists the SBAR Panel
recommendations and OSHA’s
responses to these recommendations.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00293
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
3 ...............................
2 ...............................
A few SERs voiced strong concerns about the underlying data on heat related injuries and illnesses. SERs felt that the numbers of illnesses, injuries, and fatalities reported in the BLS data are low relative to the total
number of employees nationally, suggesting that any action or change is
unnecessary. One SER thought that the number of heat illnesses and injuries is statistically insignificant, given the millions of workers in the
labor force. SERs requested clarification on these data including requests that the data on heat-related injury and illness be published in the
record by detailed industry.
Many SERs questioned whether the recordkeeping requirements that
OSHA had suggested were necessary. Some SERs thought they would
have to hire additional staff or take time away from other safety initiatives to complete the paperwork outlined in the regulatory framework.
SERs thought that documenting rest breaks would be infeasible, and
that recordkeeping of daily temperature monitoring was unnecessary and
would be burdensome to comply with.
SERs felt that the heat triggers that OSHA had suggested in the regulatory
framework were too low and questioned whether the heat triggers were
appropriate across different regions of the U.S. Some SERs reported
finding OSHA’s table of heat triggers presented in the regulatory framework and the use of an initial and a high heat trigger to be confusing and
stressed that OSHA should keep the requirements simple. SERs also
asked how the heat triggers had been determined and whether they
were scientifically based. However, other SERs supported having two
trigger levels and some reported that they had already implemented policies based on multiple trigger points already. Some SERs suggested
using the National Weather Service heat advisory as a single measure
for a heat trigger tailored to local conditions.
SERs expressed concern that the potential standard should not be a ‘‘one
size fits all’’ approach and that it would be difficult for a standard to reasonably and effectively cover heat hazards in all settings and all regions
of the U.S. SERs agreed that an OSHA standard should be flexible with
a programmatic approach that allows employers to tailor their program to
their particular workplace. SERs thought this flexibility was necessary for
employers to prevent heat-related injuries and illnesses in their workplace most effectively. Some SERs thought the employer should determine what approaches should be implemented to address heat based on
the conditions in their work settings as long as those approaches adhere
to the regulatory framework. One SER asked whether the regulatory
text, like the regulatory framework provided to SERs, could list multiple
options employers can choose from.
1 ...............................
2 ...............................
Finding
The Panel recommends that OSHA
reconsider or simplify recordkeeping of temperature monitoring
and not require documentation of
rest breaks unless the agency can
show that such a requirement is
necessary or appropriate to protect
workers. The Panel also recommends that OSHA reconsider
other potential recordkeeping to
determine if those are necessary
or appropriate and whether they
positively impact worker safety and
health.
The Panel recommends that OSHA’s
standard include performancebased provisions where practical to
allow employers to tailor their heat
injury and illness prevention program to their setting and situations,
including the local climate and the
type of work being performed, and
also taking into consideration the
size and complexity of the employer’s operations. To the extent practicable, the Panel recommends that
OSHA offer multiple methods of
compliance with provisions of a
heat standard.
In light of input received from SERs,
the Panel recommends that OSHA
consider whether the heat trigger
levels presented in the regulatory
framework—both the initial and
high heat triggers—are too low,
and also recommends that the
agency present these heat triggers
as simply as possible to avoid confusion. The Panel also recommends that OSHA provide the
methodology used to select the
heat triggers, including any scientific evidence or other supporting
data, along with consideration of
potential alternatives.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
clearly present the data being used
to justify a potential standard. The
Panel recommends that OSHA
thoroughly explore whether and
how the injury, illness, and fatality
data support the promulgation of a
heat standard.
Recommendation
OSHA’s response
OSHA is proposing requirements in this section, based in part on feedback, which will allow more flexibility for workplaces. Employers of only
indoor workplaces will be required to create written or electronic records
of on-site temperature measurements and retain these records for a minimum of six months. Employers have flexibility on how they can comply
with the recordkeeping requirement by using monitoring devices with sufficient storage capability, or employers could comply by creating and
maintaining written records based on monitoring devices that do not
have digital recording capabilities. OSHA has determined that this provision would have a positive impact on worker safety and health by assisting OSHA in determining conditions at the worksite, and aiding employers to identify trends in indoor temperatures and their effect on employee
health and safety. In part based on feedback, OSHA is not requiring
documentation of rest breaks.
The agency has provided a discussion of the data on occupational heat-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities in Section V.A., Risk Assessment,
and Section VIII.E., Benefits, including the significant likelihood of underreporting of such data. The agency relied on publicly available data from
BLS, State health departments, and the peer-reviewed literature. OSHA
discusses the need for the standard in Section III.B., Need for Proposal,
and whether the threshold for agency action is met in Section VI., Significance of Risk.
The agency has provided a discussion of the methodology for determining
the initial and high heat triggers in Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High
Heat Triggers, which cites both observational and experimental evidence. OSHA simplified the triggers that were initially presented in the
regulatory framework; there are no longer ambient temperature triggers
or separate, lower forecast triggers. OSHA has also provided evidence
that higher triggers, including the NWS heat advisories, would not be
protective enough.
The agency has drafted a proposed standard that ensures flexibility for
workplaces. By incorporating elements that can be tailored to the workplace, OSHA is effectively addressing concerns of applicability to various
workplace settings while establishing minimum requirements that are intended to ensure the heat injury and illness prevention program remains
effective and accessible to employees. For example, the proposed
standard does not apply to indoor workplaces where air conditioning
consistently keeps the ambient temperature below 80°F, the proposed
standard only requires employers with 10 or more employees to have a
written plan, allows employers to choose the heat metric that works best
for their workplace, and make other determinations based on their employee operations. OSHA requests further comment on the flexibility of
the provisions included in the proposed heat standard.
TABLE VIII.F.7—OSHA’S RESPONSES TO THE SBAR PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS
Number
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70989
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
6 ...............................
5 ...............................
Many SERs reported already monitoring the temperature at their facility or
job sites. SERs relied on various heat assessment methods including the
OSHA/NIOSH Heat Safety Tool App, local weather forecasts, the National Weather Service’s online calculator or measuring temperature with
standard thermometers, heat index monitors, or wet bulb globe thermometers. Some SERs thought terms like ‘‘wet/dry bulb temperature’’
and ‘‘heat index’’ would be confusing while other SERs thought that
measurements with a WBGT was complicated and may be difficult for
some employers to use. SERs told the Panel about some difficulties they
have with measuring temperature at their locations. SERs with indoor
worksites said that the temperature can vary across different parts of
their facility. SERs with workers who are mobile and work at many different locations or elevations throughout the day said that temperature
monitoring was a challenge for them because of various complicating
factors.
The majority of the SERs said that they allowed their employees to take
rest breaks when they needed to, but many objected to OSHA including
a specific frequency or duration of breaks in a rule. Some SERs said
that shorter, more frequent breaks might be ideal sometimes, while others said that the intensity of the job or other personal, physiological characteristics may make more frequent breaks necessary. Some SERs
thought that giving 15-minute breaks every two hours would be unworkable in their situation. SERs in construction and manufacturing reported
that there were times that work could not simply stop while workers took
breaks (e.g., while pouring concrete, during certain industrial processes).
In these cases, SERs reported that they rotated workers between more
and less strenuous tasks. SERs with workers who wear complex PPE
(e.g., construction, tree care, electric power) reported that their employees sometimes prefer to finish their work rather than stop for a break
which would require removing and redonning their PPE. SERs whose
employees worked at heights (e.g., roofing, telecommunications towers)
expressed concern that these employees could be put in more danger if
they were required to climb down from their working position for a break
and back up afterwards. These SERs wondered if breaks needed to
occur in a certain location like a shaded area on the ground or in an airconditioned vehicle. A number of other SERs similarly wondered whether
they had to provide air-conditioned break areas and require their employees take rest breaks in those areas. Some SERs said that their
workers preferred to take breaks in non-air-conditioned spaces like
shaded outdoor areas. A few SERs wondered whether other activities including things like downtime while waiting for materials to be delivered,
toolbox talks or job briefings, engaging in non-strenuous work tasks, or
driving between jobs could be considered breaks.
Finding
SERs raised concerns about recordkeeping of heat related injuries and illnesses requiring only first aid. Other SERs asked why OSHA is considering requiring records of first-aid-only injuries and illnesses that are
heat-related while not requiring records of first-aid-only injuries and illnesses that are not heat-related. Some SERs stated it was unclear what
first aid means regarding heat illness with one SER wondering whether
asking workers to take a break and hydrate because they appear to be
hot would need to be captured as a first-aid incident.
Number
PO 00000
Frm 00294
The Panel recommends that OSHA
consider allowing employers some
flexibility, to the extent feasible
within the constraints of the OSH
Act, in the frequency of any rest
breaks required in a rule. The
Panel also recommends that
OSHA clarify where workers can
take breaks and provide the maximum flexibility possible to employers to determine what works best
for their employees and situation.
The Panel further recommends
that OSHA clarify what, if any, activities employees can engage in
during rest breaks.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
not include a requirement for recording first-aid-only heat-related
illnesses or injuries unless the
agency can demonstrate some
particular circumstances where
such a requirement is necessary or
appropriate to protect workers
when such records are not required under OSHA’s general injury and illness recordkeeping regulation.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
allow flexibility in monitoring methods and not mandate a single
method that employers must use to
measure heat in their workplace or
on their worksite. The Panel also
recommends that OSHA clarify
how and when temperature monitoring must occur for all employers
but especially for those with indoor
settings and those with mobile
workforces.
Recommendation
The proposed standard only requires rest breaks at the initial heat trigger
when they are needed to prevent overheating. Under the high heat trigger, a minimum of a 15-minute paid rest break would be required every
two hours because of increased risk of HRI at and above the high heat
trigger, but some flexibility is provided by allowing a meal break to count
as a rest break. Proposed provisions under the initial heat trigger specify
the requirements for indoor and outdoor break areas and provide flexibility by allowing employers to choose from different options of cooling
methods in the break area (e.g., shade OR air conditioning for outdoor
break areas; air conditioning OR increased air movement and, if appropriate, de-humidification for indoor break areas). The summary and explanation for rest breaks under the high heat triggers clarifies that no
work activities would be allowed during rest breaks.
The agency has drafted a proposed standard that would provide flexibility
to employers in both what heat metric they can use and how they are required to monitor the worksite (including allowing outdoor employers to
use the forecast instead of on-site monitoring). OSHA provides guidance
on how and when monitoring must occur.
OSHA is not proposing to require additional injury and illness reporting beyond what is required by the existing Recordkeeping standard (29 CFR
1904.7). The only proposed recordkeeping requirement applies to monitoring data collected for indoor work areas.
OSHA’s response
TABLE VIII.F.7—OSHA’S RESPONSES TO THE SBAR PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS—Continued
4 ...............................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70990
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
9 ...............................
8 ...............................
7 ...............................
Many SERs objected to OSHA’s option in the regulatory framework for
gradual acclimatization to heat, requiring employees to gradually ramp
up their exposure to heat over the course of a few days. Several SERs
said that if they force employees to work fewer hours due to acclimatization requirements, these workers might just quit and look elsewhere for
work. Other SERs reported that they must pay their union laborers for a
minimum of four hours regardless of whether they worked that full time
meaning that the SERs would be paying for time not worked during the
acclimatization period. Other SERs said it would not be possible to move
workers to light duty jobs during the acclimatization period either because they did not have enough of that type of work or because light
duty tasks were not available at their workplaces. Some SERs thought
that strictly prescribed acclimatization requirements were unnecessary
because new workers they hired were either from the area and used to
the weather, were coming from jobs where they performed similar tasks
in similar conditions, or only those who were fit and able to work in hot
weather would ‘‘self-select’’ into the types of jobs they offered. Many
SERs reported having some form of enhanced supervision or ‘‘buddy
system’’ for workers who were acclimatizing to the hot working conditions. Some said that new workers worked alongside supervisors during
their first weeks on the job which allowed for supervision of their heat
tolerance. Others said that the training process where new employees
are learning and working up to doing the jobs fully and on their own
serves as an acclimatization process.
SERs raised a number of concerns about applying a heat standard to
workers who work alone and workers who move between job locations
throughout the day. SERs mentioned that they were not sure how they
would have to monitor the temperature when workers were working at
multiple locations since employees could cover a large range with varying climate conditions throughout their workday. One SER said it was
not clear what areas need to be routinely monitored if the work site is
not fixed while others were concerned that tracking the temperature forecasts and relevant heat triggers for the worksite that each worker or
crew is visiting that day would be difficult. SERs said that such tracking
becomes a greater challenge if each worker or crew visits multiple worksites within a day. SERs were also concerned that it would be difficult to
monitor workers who work alone. SERs mentioned that it would be difficult to ensure that employees are taking required breaks with one SER
saying that they believed this would become more difficult if mandated
rest break durations depend on whether the temperatures were at or
above the initial heat trigger or high heat trigger. Other SERs mentioned
the difficulty of monitoring employees for signs and symptoms of heat injury and illness when employees are working alone. While some had
equipment that monitored an employee’s movement and reported to the
employer if that movement stopped or procedures for regular check-ins
via phone or tablet applications, other SERs said that they would not be
able to implement a buddy system or close supervision of employees
given the work arrangements.
SERs universally reported supplying drinking water to their employees generally with reusable bottles and water coolers, single use water bottles,
or plumbed fountains or faucets. While SERs acknowledged the necessity of supplying drinking water, some objected to some of the specified
potential requirements in the regulatory framework. One SER felt that
the amount of water specified as required was too much. Some SERs
thought that the phrase ‘‘suitably cool’’ was vague and did not take into
account employee preferences for their water temperature.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
PO 00000
The Panel recommends that OSHA
address the unique situations of
employers whose employees work
alone and/or travel to many worksites each day and offer flexibility
to these employers and clarify the
employer’s responsibilities for employees in these circumstances.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
provide multiple options for acclimatization in the rule to allow employers flexibility in determining the
best method for acclimatizing their
workers.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
consider eliminating or better defining the term ‘‘suitably cool’’ to provide clarity and take employee
needs and preferences into account. The Panel also recommends that OSHA provide clarity on methods for complying with
any potential requirements related
to the provision of water and allow
for flexibility, when appropriate, in
the amount of water required to be
provided.
Frm 00295
OSHA is proposing to establish heat triggers using a measurement of the
Heat Index which is more readily available through local forecast data or
heat monitoring apps. As discussed in this preamble, employers do not
need to monitor all work locations continuously and are only required to
verify whether the temperature exceeds the triggers in order to implement the applicable protective measures. OSHA recognizes that employees working alone can be at a greater risk for HRI due to the lack of immediate assistance or interventions. Therefore, OSHA has proposed that
the employer maintain a form of two-way communication and regularly
communicate with employees. When the high heat trigger is met or exceeded, the proposed standard would further require employers to stay
in contact at least every two hours with employees working alone. Requirements for safety and health procedures when employees are working alone are not unique to this rule. OSHA believes that the employer
responsibilities outlined under the proposal are necessary to ensure the
safety of workers.
OSHA is including the term ‘‘suitably cool’’ in the proposed standard to
provide flexibility to employers and maintain consistency with the field
sanitation standard (29 CFR 1928.110), which has incorporated a ‘‘suitably cool’’ requirement since it was promulgated in 1987. The phrase is
also used in California’s heat standard for outdoor workplaces (Cal.
Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395). As discussed in Risk Reduction, Section V.C., the temperature of drinking water impacts hydration levels, as
cool or cold water has been found to be more palatable than warm
water, thus leading to higher consumption of cool water and decreased
risk of dehydration. Additional evidence highlighted in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, shows that cool fluid ingestion has beneficial effects for reducing heat strain. OSHA provides additional guidance on what it considers ‘‘suitably cool’’ in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements section of the proposed provision. OSHA is specifying the amount of water
that employers need to provide to employees, not an amount that employees need to drink. OSHA provides guidance for how employers can
comply with the provision of 1 quart of cool water every hour.
OSHA preliminarily finds that acclimatization is an effective preventative
measure for preventing HRI and fatalities in unacclimatized workers. The
proposed standard provides options for how to protect unacclimatized
workers. The proposed standard provides a gradual exposure option as
well as an option for employers to implement the requirements at the
high heat trigger during an employee’s first week of work. OSHA requests further comment on the proposed acclimatization provision and
on a number of topics relating to acclimatization, including acclimatization during heat waves, acclimatization following illness, requests for examples of existing acclimatization programs and the clarity of the explanation of ‘‘similar heat conditions.’’
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70991
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
12 .............................
11 .............................
PO 00000
Frm 00296
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
SERs disagreed with some specific time and cost estimates that were provided in the SER background document. SERs thought that OSHA’s estimates for the amount of time it would take to develop the written plan
and to conduct the hazard analysis were both too low as were the estimates related to monitoring of employees, measuring or calculating the
heat index or temperature, and recording heat-related illnesses or injuries. One SER said that OSHA’s estimate of breaks was too low because it only counted the break time but did not account for the time
spent going to and from the break area.
Finding
Almost all SERs agreed that training is one of the most important steps an
employer can take to prevent heat injury and illness in their workers.
SERs mentioned that they already provide some form of training on heat
injury and illness prevention including recognition of signs and symptoms
and how to respond and other topics including the importance of staying
hydrated (electrolytes or water); working at a comfortable pace; contacting a supervisor to get an extra break or water; accessing and locations of cool down areas; sleeping well and being well rested; acclimatizing; and medical treatment of heat-related illnesses and injury.
Training was reported to be provided in both formal and informal settings
including regular training classes and tailgate or toolbox talks. Several
SERs felt that a heat standard be centered around training; one SER
thought that a heat standard should mandate training while questioning
the necessity and usefulness of other potential requirements.
SERs reported a mix of informal and formal heat injury and illness prevention programs. Some said that they do not have a program that is in written form; while others said they have a written program that is relatively
short in length (i.e., in bullet points). SERs were largely supportive of the
idea of a written program or plan. SERs said that they believe a written
plan could be beneficial and one SER said that their heat plan reduced
the number of first-aid and more serious safety incidents, reduced workers’ compensation costs, and maybe improved absenteeism. SERs said
that employers should have flexibility to develop and implement such
plans. Some SERs supported the potential exemption in the regulatory
framework for very small employers (e.g., those with 10 or fewer employees) from the requirement for the plan to be in writing; one SER
stated that requiring a written plan would place significant burden on
these employers. Most SERs agreed that, if the standard required updates of a written plan, that requirement should be for annual reviews
and updates. One SER commented that they believed option to review
and update ‘‘whenever necessary to ensure ongoing effectiveness’’ or
‘‘whenever a heat-related illness or injury occurs’’ were vague and/or unclear.
Number
The Panel recommends that OSHA
review time and cost estimates in
the economic analysis and revise
where appropriate to take the experience and feedback of the
SERs into account.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
include a requirement for a written
heat injury and illness prevention
program that allows employers the
flexibility to tailor their plans to their
specific industry, location, and activities. The Panel also recommends that OSHA consider an
exemption for very small employers from the requirement for the
plan to be in writing. The Panel further recommends that, unless the
agency determines that it is appropriate to do otherwise, review and
update of the plan be required annually and if updates are required
in additional situations that those
situations be clearly delineated to
reduce confusion and ambiguity.
The Panel recommends that OSHA
include a robust training provision
in a heat standard. The Panel also
recommends that OSHA continue
to provide support for employer
training efforts by providing training
materials, sample curriculum, videos, and/or other methods.
Recommendation
OSHA is proposing a requirement for a heat injury and illness prevention
plan (HIIPP) as a provision of the standard. The proposed HIIPP requirement allows employers the flexibility to tailor their plans to their specific
industry location and work activities. OSHA understands that a HIIPP
must be adaptable to the physical characteristics of the work site and
the job tasks performed by employees, as well as the hazards identified
by the employer when designing their HIIPP. To increase flexibility, in
cases where employers have multiple work sites that are substantially
similar, the HIIPP may be developed by work site type rather than by individual work sites so long as any site-specific information is included in
the plan (e.g., phone numbers and addresses). The proposed HIIPP requirement is consistent with the SBAR Panel’s recommendation and requires that only employers with more than 10 employees need to have a
written plan. For employers with 10 or fewer employees, the agency
does not believe that there is a high likelihood of misunderstanding when
employers communicate their HIIPPs to employees verbally. Employers
with existing plans would be required to modify and/or update their current HIIPP plans to incorporate any missing required elements and provide training on these new updates or modifications to all employees.
Furthermore, to delineate requirements surrounding HIIPP reviews and
updates more clearly, OSHA is proposing to require the employer to review and evaluate the effectiveness of the HIIPP whenever a heat-related injury or illness occurs that results in death, days away from work,
medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness, but at least
annually. Following each review, the employer would be required to update the HIIPP as necessary. OSHA preliminarily finds that a heat-related injury that results in death, days away from work, medical treatment beyond first aid or loss of consciousness warrants an evaluation of
the HIIPP because it could potentially indicate a deficiency of the HIIPP.
OSHA provides more information in Section VII.C., Explanation of Proposed Requirements, of the HIIPP requirement.
All time and cost estimates provided in the SER background document
were reviewed and revised for the NPRM where appropriate with consideration for SERs feedback and experience. As a result, travel time (time
spent going to and from the break area) is added to the rest break costs.
OSHA is not proposing additional requirements for recordkeeping for
heat-related illnesses or injuries in the proposed standard, so it no
longer requires a cost estimate. For some estimates, OSHA’s review determined that the estimates in the SER background document were appropriate (e.g., outdoor monitoring costs). In other cases, OSHA determined that the estimates in the SER background document overestimated costs or did not account for overlap between provisions and
therefore reduces the estimates (e.g., indoor hazard assessment).
OSHA preliminarily finds that it is necessary to train employees so they
can recognize heat-related hazards and understand the appropriate
steps they can take to minimize potential health effects in themselves
and coworkers. Training on the employer’s policies and procedures to
address heat hazards would be an essential part of this proposed standard because it would help to ensure that employees understand heat
hazards, the workplace-specific control measures that would be implemented to address the hazard, and the requirements of the proposed
standard. OSHA has provided guidance on how employers can comply
with the training provision and expects to provide sample training materials and other compliance assistance products to assist employers in
implementing the requirements of the proposed standard if promulgated.
OSHA’s response
TABLE VIII.F.7—OSHA’S RESPONSES TO THE SBAR PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS—Continued
10 .............................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
70992
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
13 .............................
Most SERs with indoor settings reported using some form of ventilation
and air movement to cool their facilities. However, many of these SERs
said it would be infeasible to lower the temperature using air-conditioning
because their buildings were too large to do this effectively. A few SERs
said they are limited in where they can place fans due to work processes or risk of contamination of materials or the air. Some SERs also
said that they could not use some of the engineering controls discussed
in the background documents such as misting fans (which could introduce slipping hazards or damage materials) or portable shelters (which
cannot be used on work surfaces such as roofs). Other SERs discussed
the difficulties of implementing engineering controls in buildings they do
not own or when working on in-progress construction projects. SERs
also questioned whether some administrative controls suggested in the
background materials would work for their setting. While some SERs
said they adjusted work start and stop times to avoid working during the
hottest part of the day, some SERs said they were unable to do so, for
example, because they could not work too early in residential areas or
because employees preferred a later start time. Some SERs said they
used text messages or other electronic communications to remind employees of or alert them to heat hazards. Some SERs whose employees
spend a significant part of their day driving worried that sending their
employees electronic notifications would distract them and put them at
risk of motor vehicle accidents. Many SERs were, however, supportive
of the idea of monitoring employees for signs and symptoms of heat illness and injury. Some SERs reported that they utilized a ‘‘buddy system’’ where employees monitored each other, or supervisors monitored
employees, for signs and symptoms of heat illness or injury. Some SERs
said they have found this practice very useful in reducing illnesses and
injuries related to heat. Some SERs reported that they use technology
like electronic monitors or check-ins via cell phone or tablet although
SERs whose employees are mobile reported that that can be difficult if
the employee is in a location with limited cell service. SERs suggested
that biometric monitors or self-monitoring of urine color to determine hydration levels could be useful as well.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
The Panel recommends that OSHA
offer as much flexibility as possible
to allow employers to implement
engineering and administrative
controls that are feasible and appropriate for their workplace and
activities.
OSHA has drafted the rule to allow maximum flexibility in implementing engineering controls while still protecting workers. The agency has attempted to minimize feasibility issues by providing employers with multiple engineering control options for compliance, allowing them to select
the controls that can be most effectively implemented. OSHA believes
that the proposed control options are important and needed to adequately protect workers from HRIs as discussed in the Explanation of
Proposed Requirements.
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00297
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
70993
70994
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
G. Distributional Analysis
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Impact of Heat on Underserved
Populations
Executive Order 13985, ‘‘Advancing
Racial Equity and Support for
Underserved Communities through the
Federal Government,’’ directs Federal
agencies to conduct an equity
assessment on a subset of the agencies’
programs and policies. OSHA has
chosen to include an equity assessment
regarding the proposed standard for
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings and
the potential impact on economically or
historically underserved populations.
The purpose of an equity assessment is
to analyze the distribution of regulatory
impacts across individuals, households,
and businesses/industries, with
particular attention to economically or
historically underserved or vulnerable
groups. This assessment, which is
entirely separate from OSHA’s legal
findings and rationale supporting the
proposed standard for Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention in Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings, concludes that
the proposed standard would have a
positive impact on underserved
populations (e.g., low-income and
Hispanic workers) by providing
workplace protections from extreme
temperatures that have a
disproportionate impact on occupations
held by individuals from underserved
communities.
A. Heat Exposure of Workers by
Socioeconomic Status
Extreme temperatures affect the entire
economy and pose a significant risk to
individuals employed in workplaces
(see Section II.B., Need for Proposal and
Section II.C., Events Leading to the
Proposal). This threat is unevenly
distributed across demographic and
socioeconomic groups, exacerbating
inequalities. Individuals from
underserved populations are more likely
to work in occupations with heat-related
risks (Ndugga et al., 2023). Evidence
from the American Community Survey
covering 2018–2022 (Ruggles et al.,
2024) suggests that workers from
historically underserved groups in core
industries (see Section VIII.B.II.A.,
Potentially Affected Industries) have
greater exposure to occupational heat-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
related hazards, with more severe
outcomes that impact their ability to
work. That includes, for example,
exposure to high outdoor temperatures,
radiant heat sources, or insufficient
temperature control or ventilation in
indoor work settings. The methodology
to estimate exposure by demographic
group is outlined in detail in appendix
C.
Figure VIII.G.1 shows that workers
from low-income households are
disproportionately exposed to heatrelated hazards in (1) indoor work
settings that emit heat during the
production process, (2) indoor work
settings that have inadequate climate
control, or (3) outdoor work settings (see
exposure definitions in Section VIII.B.,
Profile of Affected Industries). This is
non-trivial as occupational injuries and
illnesses cost the average worker
$35,000 with wide-reaching health
impacts including the threat of death
(Leigh, 2011; Ndugga and Artiga, 2023;
Park et al., 2021).104 Thus, workers from
low-income households who are often
challenged with affording in-home air
conditioning (Mann and Schuetz, 2022)
face a concurrent burden: threat of
costly workplace heat hazards.
Workers from low-income households
are most vulnerable to occupational heat
exposure across all phases of their
careers. For example, workers aged 16 to
64 from households in the lowest
income deciles face elevated indoor and
outdoor exposure to heat-hazards (see
Figure VIII.G.2.). The highest levels of
exposure occur among workers aged 35–
54 earning less than $60,000
(approximately 15 percent in indoor and
outdoor workplaces). This high level of
exposure occurs during these workers’
peak earning years, posing a threat to
not only health but also lifetime
earnings which can facilitate
socioeconomic mobility (see Figure
VIII.G.2., Panels B and C).
Figures VIII.G.3. and VIII.G.4. show
that there is variation in exposure
104 Note that this estimated cost to workers is
different from the Value of a Statistical Injury (VSI)
used to estimate benefits in Section VIII.E., Benefits.
The VSI is an estimate of individuals’ desire to
avoid an illness or injury and calculates the
willingness to pay to avoid said illness or injury.
The $35,000 quoted reflects the average social cost
of a workplace injury reported to workers
compensation in 2021$.
PO 00000
Frm 00298
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
among low-income workers by sex,
ethnicity, and race. While low-income
individuals from some underserved
backgrounds have heat hazard exposure
levels exceeding 10 percent of the
worker population (e.g. workers
identifying as female, Black, multiracial), male and Hispanic workers have
the highest level of exposure to
workplace heat hazards. Men earning
less than $60,000 are nearly twice as
likely to be exposed to workplace heatrelated hazards than women, peaking at
17 percent for men working in nonclimate controlled indoor settings and
19 percent for men working in outdoor
settings.105 Similarly, respective
exposure to workplace heat hazards
ranges from 16 percent to 19 percent in
non-climate controlled indoor and
outdoor settings among low-income
Hispanic workers.
Despite evidence of elevated exposure
along the socioeconomic gradient,
research finds that many of the most
vulnerable workers have minimal to no
workplace protections to manage
occupational heat stress (MorrisseyBasler et al., 2024; Luque et al., 2019;
Flocks et al., 2013). Although workers
are aware of the health consequences of
exposure to occupational heat stress,
they report a feeling of lack of control
over the condition of their work setting
(Flocks et al., 2013). In the absence of
formal workplace protections, some
vulnerable workers assume
responsibility for and implement heat
stress management practices to preserve
their well-being rather than view the
employer as the arbitrator for protection
against occupational heat hazards
(Luque et al., 2019). Some of these
worker-initiated heat stress prevention
strategies may not be grounded in
evidence-based science. Lack of
employer safeguards against elevated
temperature can, in turn, reinforce
disparities in occupational heat
exposure that leave the most vulnerable
workers overexposed to preventable
heat-induced injuries, illnesses, and
fatalities.
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
105 For context, in 2022, the median annual
earnings of men in the United States was $62,350
(Ruggles et al., 2024).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70995
Figure VIII.G.1. Workplace Heat Hazard Exposure by Income, 2018 - 2022
Panel A. Indoor (Production Process Heat)
14
10
Income decile
Panel B. Indoor (Uncontrolled Climate)
12
10
8
6
4
2
,
,
o~-------------------, , , ,
~
/
#
""
,,,t''
_,1,t·
"
...
,,,,t· ...,l,
...
.,.
~,
.,,.
~,
.,,,§'·
Income decile
Panel C. Outdoor
12
10
8
6
4
2
o~-------------------.
.
.
.
'
'9...~
.;fr'
~•·.'
,I"
~••.:
.,,.
~.'
4''
!'o,..11:i"
....~
'i'
~.,/......
~'f
-."'-
1\'
.,,f'
.....
Income decile
Source: OSHA calculations based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) from
2018-2022 (Ruggles et al., 2024).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00299
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.000
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
✓
✓
70996
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Figure VIII.G.2. Workplace Heat Hazard Exposure by Income and Age, 20182022
Panel A. Indoor (Production Process Heat)
16
14
12
~
~
Q)
a.
10
8 -
-
Age
6
f,.>•.q
1s-2•
t>-'\;i
16-24
iliilll
25-34
-35-44
2
-45-54
c::Joo-64
Source: OSHA calculations based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) from
2018-2022 (Ruggles et al., 2024).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00300
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.001
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
0
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
70997
Figure VIII.G.3. Workplace Heat-Related Hazard Exposure by Income and Sex,
2018-2022
Panel A. Indoor (Production Process Heat)
21
15
i:::
12
tl':
9
~
Income decile
Panel B. Indoor (Uncontrolled Climate)
21
Income decile
Panel C. Outdoor
21
18
Source: OSHA calculations based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) from
2018-2022 (Ruggles et al., 2024).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00301
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.002
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Income decile
70998
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Figure VIII.G.4. Workplace Heat Hazard Exposure by Income, Ethnicity, and Race
[a] (2018 - 2022)
Panel A. Indoor (Production Process Heat)
21
18
15
12
9··
Income decile
Panel B. Indoor (Uncontrolled Climate)
21
18"
15
~ Hlsp;~nle
IIIIJAsian
~Bl.lck
-Othor
CJ
Whl~ (Non-Hispanic)
Panel C. Outdoor
21
18
15
12
Hf,~p.anic
A,lan
B!aek
Oth1:tr
While (Non-Hlsparrl(I)
Source: OSHA calculations based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) from
2018-2022 (Ruggles et al., 2024).
[a] Other group is composed of individuals with multi-race ancestry or those reporting a race other than
Hispanic, Black, Asian, or White (non-Hispanic).
BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
B. Productivity and Health Effects
The figures above show the fraction of
workers who are exposed to workplace
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heat-related hazards and therefore likely
to be covered by the proposed standard.
Under an assumption that benefits of
the standard correspond 1-for-1 to
PO 00000
Frm 00302
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
coverage, this fraction can be translated
into the fraction of workers benefiting
from the standard. In other words,
translating the results from the figures
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.003
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Income decile
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
into benefits from the standard in terms
of increased productivity, improved
health, or other outcomes makes the
assumption that all work-related
exposure to heat is explained by
industry and occupation. This
assumption could over- or under-state
the exposure to heat on the job that
workers face. As a recent study of heat
and occupational injuries discusses
(Park et al., 2021), if there are
compensating differentials for the risk
associated with heat exposure, then
workers exposed to the risk would be
paid higher wages. This could be the
case even within industry and
occupation categories. Alternatively, if
workers and employers negotiate over
total compensation from income and
amenities, then a worker could receive
both lower wages and higher heat
exposure (a workplace disamenity) due
to imperfectly competitive labor
markets 106 (Burdett and Mortensen,
1998; Sorkin, 2018).
Existing studies on workplace-related
heat exposure do not currently say
which of these two possibilities holds
within industry and occupation groups.
A recent review summarizes research on
the effect of temperature on labor
productivity (Lai et al., 2023). The focus
of the literature has been on educational
outcomes, cross-country comparisons,
or cross-industry effects. Recent work
on intensive-margin labor supply (i.e.,
hours worked) and heat exposure in the
U.S. shows that whether or not the
industry of workers is controlled for in
the statistical model does not largely
change the estimated effect of heat
exposure on time spent working
(Neidell et al., 2021). This result
indicates that industry-level differences
in exposure to heat do not fully capture
the effect of heat on labor supply. The
study does not control for occupation
group, so exposure within versus across
occupations cannot be parsed.
An analysis of workplace injuries and
heat exposure in California examines
the distribution of heat-related
occupational injuries (Park et. al., 2021).
The analysis is done using California
106 The existence of jobs with different working
conditions, in conjunction with variation in worker
preferences, could in effect be the source of firms’
power in the labor market that allows them to lower
wages in the first place (Card et al., 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Department of Workers’ Compensation
data, and the injuries are geocoded at
the zip code of the worksite. In an
analysis that controls for zip code-bymonth and county-by-month-by-year
fixed effects (as well as precipitation),
the authors find that for the average
worker, injuries go up on days with
temperature above 90 °F. The increase
in injuries is 36 percent larger for
workers in the lowest income quintile
compared to workers in the highest
income quintile.107 The analysis also
examines effects by worker age and sex.
It finds that workers younger than 30
years of age are 3 times more likely to
experience a workplace injury on a day
about 90 °F compared to a worker older
than 60.108 Male workers are 2.3 times
more likely to experience injury
compared to female workers.109
If the controls in the statistical model
substantially account for differences in
heat exposure due to industry and
occupation (for instance, because
industries and occupations are
segmented across zip codes), then the
effect would suggest that the
distribution of exposure percentages
could be a lower bound on the
distribution of realized benefits from the
proposed standard stemming from
reduced workplace injuries. Further
analysis that explicitly accounts for
industry and occupation-based exposure
to heat would be useful to determining
the extent to which workers within
industry and occupation groups are
differentially affected by heat-related
occupational injuries.
II. Averted Injuries, Illnesses, and
Fatalities by Socioeconomic Status
Table VIII.G.1. shows the estimated
number of workplace heat-related
injuries and illnesses (HRIs) as well as
heat-related fatalities averted by the
proposed standard for Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention in Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings.110 Table VIII.G.1.,
columns 1 and 3, present the prestandard estimate of HRIs and heat107 The point estimate for workers in the lowest
quintile indicates a 0.0735 increase in injuries per
day above 90 °F for the lowest quintile and a 0.0541
increase for workers in the highest quintile.
108 A point estimate of 0.0773 versus 0.0257.
109 A point estimate of 0.0837 versus 0.0359.
110 The methodology to derive exposure is
detailed in appendix C.
PO 00000
Frm 00303
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
70999
related fatalities. HRIs and heat-related
fatalities are concentrated among
workers who are low-income, in peak
earning years (aged 35—54), male, or
Hispanic. These vulnerable populations
averaged 1,066 HRIs and 7 heat-related
fatalities each year.
The Agency provides an example of
the downstream impact of these
consequential health events on firm
costs in table VIII.G.2. The estimated
cost to the employer of an HRI, such as
heat prostration (or exhaustion), is
$79,081 assuming a 3 percent profit
margin.111 112 Thus populations with
more HRIs elevate firm cost (see table
VIII.G.2., column 2). The extent to
which the employer bears the full costs
depends on the nature of their workers’
compensation insurance policy.
Nonetheless, the demographically
disaggregated cost of projected HRIs
suggests that concentrated efforts to
reduce events among the most
vulnerable populations can serve as a
meaningful mechanism to reduce firm
cost.
The Agency estimates that the
proposed standard will reduce HRIs and
heat-related fatalities among exposed
workers by 65 and 95 percent,
respectively (for more discussion, see
Section VIII.E., Benefits). Table
VIII.G.1., columns 2 and 4, present the
projected average number of HRIs and
heat-related fatalities averted by
demographic group. The largest benefits
are accrued to populations with
heightened exposure: low-income, in
peak earning years (aged 35–54), male,
and Hispanic workers. This, in the case
of heat prostration (or exhaustion),
translates into an approximate 34
percent reduction in total firm costs
among the respective demographic
groups with heightened exposure (see
table VIII.G.2., column 5).
111 Total costs include a direct cost of $37,658
and indirect costs of $41,423.
112 The estimate is derived using OSHA’s Safety
Pays Program’s ‘‘Estimated Costs of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses and Estimated Impact on
Company’s Profitability Worksheet’’ https://
www.osha.gov/safetypays/estimator. The tool
projects and estimate of how injuries and illnesses
may impact company’s profitability. The above
example assumes a 3 percent profit margin for heat
prostration (or exhaustion) that cost $79,081 (i.e.,
includes a direct cost of $37,658 and indirect costs
of $41,423).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71000
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.G.1—PROJECTED ANNUAL AVERAGE NUMBER OF HRIS & FATALITIES AVERTED BY DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP
2011–2022
HRIs
Averted
HRIs(1)
Fatalities
Averted
fatalities
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Income decile:
Less than $29,300 ....................................................................................
$29,301–$45,000 ......................................................................................
$45,001–$60,000 ......................................................................................
$60,001–$75,000 ......................................................................................
$75,001–$90,500 ......................................................................................
$90,501–$109,200 ....................................................................................
$109,201–$131,500 ..................................................................................
$131,501–$164,000 ..................................................................................
$164,001–$224,000 ..................................................................................
Age:
16–24 ........................................................................................................
25–34 ........................................................................................................
35–44 ........................................................................................................
45–54 ........................................................................................................
55–64 ........................................................................................................
Sex:
Male ..........................................................................................................
Female ......................................................................................................
Ethnicity & Race:
Hispanic ....................................................................................................
Asian/Native American .............................................................................
Black/African American ............................................................................
Other .........................................................................................................
White (Non-Hispanic) ................................................................................
1002.73
1061.66
1036.34
1012.83
988.55
959.71
921.58
884.51
830.46
651.78
690.08
673.62
658.34
642.55
623.81
599.03
574.93
539.80
28.66
31.63
30.60
29.56
28.70
27.66
26.16
24.82
22.68
27.23
30.05
29.07
28.08
27.26
26.27
24.86
23.58
21.54
882.46
931.32
974.79
980.33
971.74
573.60
605.36
633.61
637.21
631.63
23.88
26.52
28.89
28.52
27.52
22.69
25.19
27.45
27.09
26.14
1191.81
679.87
774.68
441.91
38.77
14.30
36.83
13.59
1214.52
753.23
879.14
907.34
931.37
789.44
489.60
571.44
589.77
605.39
39.98
16.49
21.89
25.26
26.76
37.98
15.67
20.79
23.99
25.42
TABLE VIII.G.2—PROJECTED COSTS SAVINGS OF ANNUAL HRI CASES BY DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP
[2011–2022]
Pre-standard
# Cases post-standard
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Savings
HRIs
Total costs
HRIs
Total costs
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Income decile:
Less than $29,300 ..................................................
$29,301–$45,000 ....................................................
$45,001–$60,000 ....................................................
$60,001–$75,000 ....................................................
$75,001–$90,500 ....................................................
$90,501–$109,200 ..................................................
$109,201–$131,500 ................................................
$131,501–$164,000 ................................................
$164,001–$224,000 ................................................
Age:
16–24 ......................................................................
25–34 ......................................................................
35–44 ......................................................................
45–54 ......................................................................
55–64 ......................................................................
Sex:
Male ........................................................................
Female ....................................................................
Ethnicity & Race:
Hispanic ..................................................................
Asian/Native American ...........................................
Black/African American ...........................................
Other .......................................................................
White (Non-Hispanic) ..............................................
(5)
1002.73
1061.66
1036.34
1012.83
988.55
959.71
921.58
884.51
830.46
79,296,891.13
83,957,134.46
81,954,803.54
80,095,609.23
78,175,522.55
75,894,826.51
72,879,467.98
69,947,935.31
65,673,607.26
350.95
371.58
362.72
354.49
346
335.9
322.55
309.58
290.66
27,753,476.95
29,384,917.98
28,684,260.32
28,033,423.69
27,362,026.00
26,563,307.90
25,507,576.55
24,481,895.98
22,985,683.46
51,543,414.18
54,572,216.48
53,270,543.22
52,062,185.54
50,813,496.55
49,331,518.61
47,371,891.43
45,466,039.33
42,687,923.80
882.46
931.32
974.79
980.33
971.74
69,785,819.26
73,649,716.92
77,087,367.99
77,525,476.73
76,846,170.94
308.86
325.96
341.18
343.12
340.11
24,424,957.66
25,777,242.76
26,980,855.58
27,134,272.72
26,896,238.91
45,360,861.60
47,872,474.16
50,106,512.41
50,391,204.01
49,949,932.03
1191.81
679.87
94,249,526.61
53,764,799.47
417.13
237.96
32,987,057.53
18,818,114.76
61,262,469.08
34,946,684.71
1214.52
753.23
879.14
907.34
931.37
96,045,456.12
59,566,181.63
69,523,270.34
71,753,354.54
73,653,670.97
425.08
263.63
307.7
317.57
325.98
33,615,751.48
20,848,124.03
24,333,223.70
25,113,753.17
25,778,824.38
62,429,704.64
38,718,057.60
45,190,046.64
46,639,601.37
47,874,846.59
Source: OSHA calculations using OSHA’s Safety Pays Program’s ‘‘Estimated Costs of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses and Estimated Impact on Company’s Profitability Worksheet’’ https://www.osha.gov/safetypays/estimator.
Note: OSHA’s Safety Pays tool projects how injuries and illnesses may impact company’s profitability. The above example assumes a 3 percent profit margin for heat prostration (or exhaustion)that cost $79,081 (i.e., includes a direct cost of $37,658 and indirect costs of $41,423). The
extent to which the employer pays the direct costs depends on the nature of the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance policy. The employer always pays the indirect costs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00304
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
III. Which business owners are impacted
by the proposed standard?
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Figure VIII.G.5 shows, for owneroperated firms in industries affected by
the proposed standard, ownership by
demographic group in 2022. The
analysis focuses on owner-operated
firms because they are recorded in ACS
data along with owner characteristics.
As such, analysis of owner-operated
firms cannot be generalized to the entire
set of affected industries, but sheds light
on an important subset of these affected
industries.
In general, the distribution of costs
(see Section VIII.C., Costs of
Compliance) are expected to have
differential effects on firms in industries
with different characteristics. In a
highly competitive product market with
many competitor suppliers of nearly
identical goods or services, there will be
limited pass-through of regulatory costs
assessed on only a subset of firms to
consumers in the form of higher prices,
as individual firms lack the market
power to shift prices. If firms raised
prices, consumers would simply shift
consumption to other firms not
burdened by similar costs (e.g., because
they operate in temperate climate) that
do not raise prices. Were firms earning
almost zero profits prior to the
imposition of these regulatory costs, it
would be possible that these firms
would shut down (and other producers
would likely expand operations, as
demand shifted to them). However,
evidence on firm revenues in these
industries indicates that firms will
largely be able to bear these costs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
without shutting down (see Section
VIII.D., Economic Feasibility).
However, the assumption of perfectly
competitive markets is not realized in
the actual economy. To the extent that
markets are less competitive, costs will
be passed through in some combination
to both consumers and firm owners,
depending on the price elasticity of
demand and the price elasticity of
supply. In addition, frictions in the
labor market will dictate how much of
the costs are borne by workers, e.g., in
the form of reduced pay or benefits. The
difference in VSL for individuals who
change and those that maintain the
same job can inform estimates of the
share of costs passed through to firm
owners, workers, and consumers across
industries in scope of this standard (see
for example, Kniesner et al.’s 2012).
Kniesner et al (2012) estimates a job
switcher-derived VSL between $6.1
million and $10 million (in 2001
dollars) with a weighted average across
job switchers and non-switchers is
between $4.4 million and $5.5 million;
the difference between these paired VSL
estimates may approximate the average,
over the first eight post-implementation
years, of the portion of per-avoidedfatality benefits that accrues to workers
without being offset by wage reductions.
The benefits of the proposed standard
could partially accrue in the form of
increased productivity from workers
less affected by heat. If firms are
currently not offering the privately
optimal level of workplace heat safety
protection (e.g., due to principal-agent
problems), these productivity gains
could even theoretically exceed the
PO 00000
Frm 00305
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71001
increased costs borne by the firm. The
magnitude of this effect determines
whether firms are net better-off or
worse-off, given both costs and
increased productivity, as a result of the
proposed standard (see sections
VIII.G.I., and VIII.G.II.).
The Census Bureau’s 2022 American
Business Survey (Census Bureau and
National Center for Science and
Engineering Statistics, 2023) covers
economic and demographic
characteristics for businesses and
business owners by sex, ethnicity, race,
and veteran status. Tables VIII.G.3. and
VIII.G.4., derived from the survey, show
that owners from historically
underrepresented populations (e.g.,
women and racial minorities) tend to be
less profitable and have heightened
concerns about the financial viability of
their business (see tables VIII.G.3. and
VIII.G.4.). These firms command 30–45
percent of the market.113 Most owners
were high-earning, non-Hispanic White
males over the age of 34.
Taken together, this evidence suggests
that the net benefits of the proposed
standard for different groups (e.g., highincome and low-income populations)
depend on how market competitiveness,
elasticities of supply and demand, and
the composition of groups affected by
the standard’s costs compare to the
distribution of the standard’s benefits
for those groups (as discussed in
sections VIII.G.I. and VIII.G.II.).
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
113 Tables VIII.G.3. and VIII.G.4. reflect a
representative sample of all U.S. industries.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71002
VerDate Sep<11>2014
,,.,,,,,,.,~,.,.,,--~"-
.,.._,..,,..,,_,,....,,...,,., ,.,
,.._,
"""'"?
V,
ro
X
0
0
W
0
~
0
Vl
0
~
0
~
0
00
0
~
0
~
0
0
....
~
~
~
a
~
Jkt 262001
~
~
~
PO 00000
.,
=
~
ro
~
....
00
Frm 00306
===
~
m
,.,.
Fmt 4701
:::r
:::,
;:;·
H~pank
Non-H~pank
~
Asian/Native American
Sfmt 4725
:;x:,
OJ
n
ro
Black/African American
White (non-Hispanic)
~
~
e=
~
~
....==~
Other
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
~
cl
".:'=
~
$45,001 - $60,000
$60,001 - $75,000
30AUP2
:::,
n
$75,001 - $90,500
3
ro
$90,501 - $109,200
0
$109,201 - $131,500
$131,501 - $164,000
$164,001 - $224,000
-------•-s.•--~·-·"·"'"""""
EP30AU24.004
j
N
~
~
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
0
~-
~
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
VerDate Sep<11>2014
---------
,--------------------0
~
0
N
0
Male
I
'
~
0
~
0
m
0
~
0
00
0
~
0
~
0
0
0
Jkt 262001
I
~
l'D
I
PO 00000
45- 54 ;
55- 64 '.
VJ
l'D
X
'
0
Frm 00307
;::;·
-=t'
~
l'D
Fmt 4701
:;x,
Sfmt 4725
~
Black/African American
White (non-Hispanic)
;::;·
f-,
____!
1
~
;
l
"'a"
Ill
"'Q..
(1)
0
Non-Hispanic
I'
::JJ
"'nl'D
White (non-Hispanic)
Other
C:
~
n
(1)
==i
!-
"'s::
"'to
~
Ill
l
"'N
j
s::~
i
(11111111111!11
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
'
!
,
II
0
N
N
n
0
§
Less than $29,300 __.
$29,301 - $45,000
!-
$29,301 - $45,000 r -
§
\1111111
$45,001 - $60,000
\1111111
~-
$60,001 - $75,000
~
!
I
i
~
::J
$75,001- $90,500 p!IIIII
0
30AUP2
l'D
lo~
Less than $29,300 1~-••
l
3
~
0
0
§
Hispanic ·1- 1
Black/African American
,
I
$60,001 - $75,000 ~
n
~
0
~
....
Asian/Native American •
Other ;
$45,001 - $60,000
::J
00
0
E.
35-44~~
45-54
~
~
i
r/J.
~
0
~
~
55- 64 !
•
m
....
i!
!!
0
~
'
:,:::,
~
Asian/Native American
m
==i
Hispanic \1111111
Non-Hispanic
~
0
n
!
,, _______ """'•''"''""'!
:::,
0
r/J.
I
m
,..:,-
~
0
Male
25-34
I I
0
W
~
16-24
1
0
N
Female
16-24 ~
25-34 35-44
~
$90,501 - $109,200
'r -
$131,501 - $164,000 i
"'"'"'
I
I
.!
3
(D
$90,501 - $109,200
$109,201 - $131,500
;
$164,001 - $224,000 ~
$224,001+
$75,001 - $90,500
0
$109,201 - $131,500 -
i
n
$131,501 - $164,000
r/J.
l
~
~
~
~
r/J.
~
!
i
$164,001 - $224,000 ~
i
$224,001_:J-+
----------------
'-'
~
,&
,(IQ
!itll
CD
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
i
VJ
0
j' ·
Female '
l'D
X
W
____,_................_ j ;
N
0
N
EP30AU24.005
71003
¢;
71004
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Female
38.7
39.9
21.4
100,0
Male
42.7
39.4
17.9
100.0
Equally male/female
41.7
39.6
18.7
100.0
White
44.0
38.5
17.4
100.0
Black or African American
26.9
41.5
31.6
100.0
American Indian and Alaska Native
30. l
42.1
27.8
100.0
Asian
27.0
47.2
25.8
100.0
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
30.1
37.5
32.4
100.0
Hispanic
28.1
43.8
28.l
100.0
Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic
34.1
40.5
25.5
100.0
Non-llispanic
42.7
39.2
18.1
100.0
Minorizy
27.6
45.2
27.2
100.0
Equally minorizy/nonminorizy
36.4
40,6
22.9
100.0
Nonminority
45.3
38.l
16.6
100.0
Vctcran
44.5
37.l
18.4
100.0
Equally veteran/nonveteran
44.3
37.7
18.0
100.0
Nonveteran
41.4
39.7
18.8
100.0
Source: Census Bureau and National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2023.
Note: Data are preliminary and will be revised when the final 2023 Annual Business Survey results are
published. Firms were asked to report the percentage of ownership, sex, ethnicity, and race, for up to four
persons owning the largest percentages in the business. A firm could be tabulated in more than one racial group
for the following reasons: the sole owner was reported to be of more than one race; the majorizy owner was
reported to be of more than one race; or a majorizy combination of owners was reported to be of more than one
race. Firms classified as minority are those classified as any race and ethnicizy combination other than nonI Iispanic and White. For more information about the survey, visit https://www.census.gov/programssurveys/abs.html. Unpublished estimates derived from this table by subtraction are subject to these same
limitations and should not be attributed to the Census Bureau.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00308
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.006
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Table VIII.G.3. Financial Health of The Business In 2022 By Sex, Race, Ethnicity, Minority
Status, and Veteran Status
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
71005
Female
63.2
21.3
15.5
100.0
Male
66.7
18.6
14.7
100.0
Equally male/female
65.1
20.1
14.8
100.0
White
66.9
18.9
14.2
100.0
Black or African American
49.5
30.2
20.3
100.0
American Indian and Alaska Native
59.1
22.1
18.9
100.0
Asian
60.7
21.3
18.0
100.0
Native I Iawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
55.0
20.7
24.3
100.0
Hispanic
59.9
21.8
18.4
100.0
Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic
60.9
23.5
15.6
100.0
Non-Hispanic
66.2
19.2
14.6
100.0
Minority
59.1
22.6
18.3
100.0
Equally minority/nonminority
62.8
22.3
14.8
100.0
Nonminority
67.4
18.6
14.0
100.0
Veteran
62.3
21.9
15.9
100.0
Equally veteran/nonveteran
63.5
21.3
15.2
100.0
Nonveteran
65.9
19.3
14.8
100.0
Source: Census Bureau and National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2023.
Note: Data are preliminary and will be revised when the final 2023 Annual Business Survey results are
published. Firms were asked to report the percentage of ownership, sex, ethnicity, and race, for up to four
persons owning the largest percentages in the business. A firm could be tabulated in more than one racial
group for the following reasons: the sole owner was reported to be of more than one race; the majority
owner was reported to be of more than one race; or a majority combination of owners was reported to be of
more than one race. Firms classified as minority are those classified as any race and ethnicity combination
other than non-Hispanic and White. For more information about the survey, visit
https:l/www.census.gov!programs-surveyslabs.html. Unpublished estimates derived from this table by
subtraction are subject to these same limitations and should not be attributed to the Census Bureau.
BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00309
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.007
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Table VIII.G.4. Business Profitability in 2022 By Sex, Race, Ethnicity, Minority Status and
Veteran Status
71006
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IV. Conclusion
The proposed standard for Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and
Indoor Work Settings is well-positioned
to protect the most at-risk workers,
across the socioeconomic gradient. In
response to the advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) for Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings, members of
Congress emphasized that ‘‘jobs at the
highest risk of heat stress illness and
death are disproportionately held by
workers of color’’ and occupational risk
from heat is the ‘‘greatest for lowincome workers’’ (OSHA–2021–0009–
0266; 0270), a concern that was echoed
by other commenters, including legal
experts (see, e.g., OSHA–2021–0009–
0524), employee representatives (see,
e.g., OSHA–2021–0009–0661), and
advocacy groups (see, e.g., OSHA–2021–
0009–0655; 0712). Commenters also
called for a heat standard that
minimizes risks of ‘‘. . . compounding
language, social service access, and
wealth-building barriers’’ (OSHA–2021–
0009–0522). The proposed standard
reinforces occupational heat hazard
protections for all workers through the
adoption of agile and culturally
attunable provisions. For example, the
provisions:
• Requiring training on occupational
heat-related risks and protections
covered by this standard (e.g., rest
breaks, water) to employees upon hire
and each year can enhance knowledge
of heat safe work practices, reducing
risk of HRIs among less experienced or
vulnerable workers;
• Requiring the provision of training
in a language and literacy level
appropriate for staff along with the
opportunities for questions and answers
ensures heat protections (e.g., paid rest
breaks, cool drinking water) are
understood and accessible to all; and
• Requiring an acclimatization
protocol along with paid rest breaks that
include adequate drinking water, shade
(or air conditioning), and medical
attention (if necessary) at initial and
high heat triggers foster non-exploitive
treatment of non-salaried vulnerable
workers (e.g., farmworkers).
The provisions have economic effects
extending beyond the direct benefits to
workers in affected industries. Heat is
the leading cause of weather-related
deaths, estimated to cost the U.S. $1
billion in excess health care costs each
year with a projection to potentially
reach $14.5 trillion in economic
damages via factors impacting the
economic production over the next fifty
years (Woolf et al., 2023; Deloitte, 2022).
The standard is projected to reduce
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
occupational heat-induced deaths
which can offset the estimated health
costs due to weather. The proposed
standard is primed for responsiveness to
workers of all levels of social
vulnerability while counteracting the
broader economic costs of extreme
temperatures.
H. Appendix A. Description of the Cost
Savings Approach
I. Introduction
This appendix details the underlying
calculations of the potential cost savings
from the proposed standard as a result
of requiring employers to provide
employees if-needed or scheduled rest
breaks. The best available evidence
indicates that when employees are
exposed to heat and are not allowed to
take rest breaks or adjust their work
hours, they must pace themselves (i.e.,
work more slowly) to counteract the
effects of heat exposure. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that when
employees are offered rest breaks, cost
savings will accrue to employers
currently noncompliant with the rest
break requirement because employees
will work more efficiently during the
work time not spent on rest breaks (i.e.,
pace less), effectively replacing pacing
with if-needed or scheduled rest breaks.
First, for the three groups defined
below, OSHA estimated the percentage
of productivity loss at the initial heat
trigger using the Heat Index (HI) option
(i.e., (HI) at or above 80 °F) and above
the high heat trigger (i.e., HI at or above
90 °F). These estimates were then
translated to equivalent lost minutes of
work time in an 8-hour work shift.
When working in hot conditions,
OSHA assumes that employees can take
three different measures to avoid
overheating:
(1) Measure #1: Employees pace
themselves; for example, an employee
shovels gravel at a slower pace in hot
conditions than they would in cooler
conditions.
(2) Measure #2: Employees take rest
breaks if needed; for example, an
employee leans on their shovel for a few
minutes at a time whenever they feel
overwhelmed by the heat, which they
otherwise would not do in cooler
conditions.
(3) Measure #3: Employees take
scheduled rest breaks; for example,
twice a day, for 15 minutes at a time, an
employee sits in a cool or shaded area
to drink water and recover from the
heat.
Depending on what is allowed by
their employers, employees can take
multiple measures to avoid overheating
(i.e., they are not mutually exclusive).
PO 00000
Frm 00310
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Three groups of employees were defined
based on possible combinations of
measures:
(1) Group #1: Employees who only
use pacing (Measure #1). These
employees do not take any rest breaks,
possibly because their employer does
not allow them to take breaks.
(2) Group #2: Employees who take
rest breaks if needed (Measure #2) and
use pacing (Measure #1). These
employees are allowed to take brief,
unscheduled breaks by their employer.
However, these rest breaks may not be
long or frequent enough to allow for a
full recovery from the heat exposure
(return to normal body temperature of
98.6°F (37°C)). Therefore, these
employees still display residual pacing
while they work.
(3) Group #3: Employees who take
scheduled rest breaks (Measure #3), may
take rest breaks if needed (Measure #2),
and use pacing (Measure #1). These
employees are allowed to take
scheduled rest breaks, which may allow
them to rehydrate and rest in a cool or
shaded area, as well as rest breaks if
needed. However, these rest breaks do
not entirely eliminate productivity loss,
as these employees also display residual
pacing, though it is expected to be to a
lesser extent than employees in Group
#2.
II. Primary Approach
This section describes the method
that OSHA used to estimate labor
productivity losses that result from
pacing due to heat exposure. First, the
general approach is summarized, next
the general assumptions of the analysis
are outlined, and then the calculations
are detailed for Groups 1, 2, and 3.
A. Summary of Approach
For the primary approach, OSHA
searched for studies that examined how
working in hot vs. cool conditions affect
employee productivity. Eastern
Research Group (ERG) performed
several literature searches (ERG, 2022a;
ERG, 2022b; ERG, 2022c) and identified
a total of 71 unique studies that could
inform the relationship between heat
and various outcomes (e.g., labor
productivity, heat strain). OSHA also
reviewed the reference lists of these
studies and identified an additional 37
studies that were potentially relevant to
this topic. This yielded a total of 108
studies considered for inclusion for the
purposes of estimating the impact of rest
breaks on labor productivity at the
initial heat and high heat triggers.
Generally, studies were excluded if they
did not meet the inclusion criteria listed
below (more detailed reasons for
exclusion are listed in table VIII.H.A.3.).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71007
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
• Measured labor productivity over a
range of temperatures, so that a
comparison could be made between a
cool (REF) condition below the initial
heat trigger (i.e., HI at or above 80 °F),
and a HOT condition(s) above the high
heat trigger (i.e., HI at or above 90 °F).
• Provided enough information on
weather conditions so that HI could be
estimated, even if based on historical
weather data.
• Collected labor productivity data.
• Reported labor productivity as
output per worker, per hour, or per day.
• Provided information as to whether
breaks were offered, and if so, how long
and frequent the breaks were.
Once studies were identified for
inclusion, each included study was
evaluated for four key pieces of
information:
(1) Which measure(s) employees took
to avoid overheating (Measures #1, #2,
and/or #3), allowing the assignment of
employees to Groups #1, #2, or #3.
(2) Weather data that describe the cool
condition, or the referent (REF)
condition. This could be when the HI
was lowest, or when output was highest
(i.e., 100% productivity). The HI was
calculated based on the ambient or dry
bulb temperature (Ta or Td, respectively)
and the relative humidity (RH).
(3) Weather data that describe the
HOT condition(s). This could be when
the HI was highest, or at which output
was lowest (i.e., 50% lower output
means 50% productivity). Again, HI was
calculated to ensure that the HOT
condition(s) exceeded both the initial
and high heat triggers.
(4) Labor productivity at both the REF
and HOT conditions, so that the loss in
labor productivity (%) could be divided
by the difference in HI (°F) and
expressed as a rate of lost labor
productivity per 1°F HI.
After calculating the rate of labor
productivity loss per 1 °F HI, OSHA
calculated the (cumulative) labor
productivity loss as a percentage
relative to the REF condition at the
initial heat trigger (HI of 80 °F) and high
heat trigger (HI of 90 °F). This labor
productivity loss was then translated
into equivalent minutes of lost work
time by multiplying by an 8-hour work
shift (480 minutes).
TABLE VIII.H.A.1—SUMMARY TABLE
Productivity
loss
per 1 °F HI
above REF
(%)
Group
Study
HI at REF
HI at HOT
1 .............
LoPalo, 2023 ...........................
66.1 °F .................
105.2 °F ...............
0.35
Foster et al., 2021 ...................
76.8 °F .................
161.4 °F ...............
0.73
Hanna, 2004 ............................
79.2 °F .................
122.3 °F ...............
0.86
Somanathan et al., 2021 .........
63.4–82 °F ...........
90–105.8 °F .........
0.29
Group Mean: 0.56%
2 .............
Ioannou et al., 2017 ................
72.1–75.6 °F ........
96.9–103.1 °F ......
0.73
Sahu et al., 2013 .....................
85.5 °F .................
116.6 °F ...............
1.00
Group Mean: 0.865%
3 .............
Dally et al., 2018 .....................
88.3 °F .................
102.6 °F ...............
1.03
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Group Mean: 1.03%
B. General Assumptions
When estimating labor productivity
loss in each study, OSHA made the
following assumptions:
a. Unless otherwise specified,
productivity at or below the REF
condition is 100%.
b. Above the REF condition, the
relationship between HI and labor
productivity loss is linear, i.e., the rate
of loss (per 1 °F HI) is a constant.
Therefore, the productivity loss function
for any firm can be fully characterized
by two parameters: the REF condition
and the rate of loss.
c. Employees in Group 2 are allowed
to take up to 10 minutes of rest breaks
if needed (with 2–4 minutes of travel
time to/from break areas).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
d. Employees in Group 3 are allowed
to take 30 minutes of scheduled rest
breaks, along with 5 minutes of rest
breaks if needed (with 2–4 minutes of
travel time to/from break areas for each
break).
e. An employee’s expected
productivity loss from pacing, given a
specific temperature and the employer’s
rest break policy, can be estimated by
the average productivity loss measured
in studies where that rest break policy
is in effect. In other words, the set of
studies with each group fully
characterizes the productivity loss that
would be experienced by employees at
a firm that offered the associated rest
break policy, regardless of what rest
break policy it currently offers.
PO 00000
Frm 00311
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Productivity
loss at
initial heat trigger
Productivity loss
at high heat
trigger
23.4 min ..............
(4.9%) ..................
11.3 min ..............
(2.4%) ..................
3.3 min ................
(0.7%) ..................
18.0 min ..............
(3.8%) ..................
40.2 min
(8.4%)
46.4 min
(9.7%)
44.5 min
(9.3%)
31.3 min
(6.5)
14.0 min ..............
40.6 min
22.3 min ..............
(4.6%) ..................
0 min ...................
(0%) .....................
57.4 min
(12.0%)
21.6 min
(4.2%)
11.2 min ..............
39.5 min
0 min ...................
(0%) .....................
8.4 min
(1.8%)
0 min ...................
8.4 min
f. An employee’s expected
productivity gains from taking new or
newly scheduled rest breaks (versus not
taking breaks or taking only if-needed
breaks) can be estimated by differences
in productivity losses due to pacing, as
measured at the initial temperature (i.e.,
trigger) at which the rest break policy
goes into effect.114
114 All else equal, using the initial temperature
(i.e., trigger) rather than the temperature inputs
used elsewhere in this PEA will yield
underestimates of the effects reported in table
VIII.H.A.1. When subsequently performing
subtraction (for expressing productivity differences
across Groups), there is ambiguity about the
direction of misestimation—because the difference
between two underestimated amounts may be overor underestimated.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
(96 - 34)%
176.8 -161.4loF
0 •73 %
1°F HI
0 •73 %
1°F HI
VerDate Sep<11>2014
The combination of temperature and
humidity that corresponded the greatest
productivity loss (66%) along the linear
portion of the curve was a Ta of 104 °F
and RH of 70%. This combination
yielded an HI of 161.4 °F for the HOT
condition.
The productivity loss from the REF
condition to the HOT condition was
estimated. In table 2. (p. 1222), the
authors reported that at the REF
condition (Ta 77 °F, RH 50%), PWC was
96%, and at the HOT condition (Ta 104
°F, RH 70%), PWC was 34%. This
yielded a rate of productivity loss of
0.73% per 1 °F HI.
Relative to the REF condition (76.8 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the initial
heat trigger (80 °F HI) is 2.35%. For an
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 11.3 minutes.
Relative to the REF condition (76.8 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) is 9.67%. For an
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 46.4 minutes.
Hanna (2004) assessed the effects of
temperature on the productivity of two
electrical journeymen in a climatic
chamber at various combinations of Ta
(ranging from -10 °F to 110 °F, in
increments of 10 °F) and RH (ranging
from 40% to 80%, in increments of
10%). The journeymen were assessed
for their performance of a routine work
task (installing duplex receptacles) over
a total of 6 days of testing. The author
stated that ‘‘for the purpose of this
study, the average number of receptacles
installed in one hour during the first
day of work measurement at 70 °F and
60% RH is expressed as 100%
productivity.’’
However, per Chart 2–1 (p. 15),
productivity clearly only began to
decline at a Ta of 80 °F and RH of 30%.
Therefore, the REF condition was
selected as a Taof 80 °F and RH of 30%.
This combination yielded an HI of 79.2
°F for the REF condition.
= 0.73% per 10F HI
* (80 - 76.8)°F HI= 2.35%O 2.3So/co * 480 minutes= 11.3 minutes
* (90 - 76.8)°F HI= 9.67%
o
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00312
9.67% * 480 minutes= 46.4 minutes
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.013
I. Group 1 Studies
LoPalo (2023) assessed the effects of
temperature on the productivity of 9,000
Demographic and Health Surveys
interviewers in 46 countries.
Interviewers were paid an hourly wage
and were assumed to be acclimatized
because they were ‘‘recruited within a
region of a country as much as possible
so that the interviewer [did] not seem
foreign to the respondent’’ (p. 197). The
author concluded that ‘‘high
temperatures are detrimental to
productivity, with interviewers
experiencing a 13.6 percent loss in
interviews per hour on days over 85 °F
wet bulb’’ (pp. 208–209).
The author clarifies, ‘‘more
specifically, I estimate the effect of daily
average wet bulb temperature falling
into a certain bin on my outcome
variable of interest, relative to an
excluded bin of 50–60 °F (50–60 °F wet
bulb corresponds with a median dry
bulb temperature of 66 °F in my
sample)’’ (p. 205). Thus, a dry bulb
temperature (Td) of 66 °F was selected
for the calculation of the heat index (HI)
for the REF condition. Per Figure 1 (p.
203), in this sample, a Td of 66 °F yields
a wet bulb temperature of 55 °F when
RH is 80%. Therefore, OSHA used 80%
RH for the calculation of HI. A Td of 66
°F and 80% RH yielded an HI of 66.1°F
for the REF condition.
The author created bins of both Td
and wet bulb temperature; the highest
bin for Td was ’≤95 °F’’. Therefore, a Td
of 95 °F was used to calculate the HI for
the HOT condition. The author states,
‘‘the highest daily average wet bulb
temperature in my sample is 87.7 °F,
while the highest daily average dry bulb
temperature is 102.6 °F’’ (p. 206). Per
Figure 1 (p. 203), in this sample, a Td
of 102.6 °F yields a wet bulb
temperature of 87.7 °F when RH is 50%.
Therefore, OSHA used 50% RH for the
calculation of HI. A Td of 95 °F and 50%
RH yielded an HI of 105.2 °F for the
HOT condition.
Finally, the productivity loss from the
REF condition to the HOT condition
was estimated. In table 2. (p. 209), the
author provides a regression estimate for
each bin of dry bulb temperature to
indicate its effect on the number of
interviews completed per hour. The
estimate in Column 2 (¥0.135, or 13.5%
loss) accounted for both Td and high
humidity and most closely matched the
estimate in Column 4 for wet bulb
temperature (¥0.136, or 13.6% loss).
Therefore, OSHA selected the estimate
for Td and high humidity, which yielded
a rate of productivity loss of 0.35% per
1 °F HI.
Relative to the REF condition (66.1 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the initial
heat trigger (80 °F HI) is 4.87%. For an
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 23.4 minutes.
Relative to the REF condition (66.1 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) is 8.37%. For an
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 40.2 minutes.
Foster et al. (2021) assessed the effects
of temperature on physical work
capacity (PWC) of 40 unacclimatized
young adult males at 22 different
combinations of air temperature (Ta)
and relative humidity (RH). First, the
authors measured maximal PWC (i.e.,
100% productivity) at a Ta of 59 °F and
RH of 50%. Then, the authors assessed
PWC under various conditions, with Ta
ranging from 77 °F to 122 °F and RH
ranging from 20% to 80%.
To determine an appropriate REF
condition, OSHA plotted the lowclothing coverage estimates from table 2.
(p. 1222) and found a sigmoidal curve.
That is, as Ta increased from 59 °F to
77 °F, the curve was nearly flat,
indicating minimal productivity
decline. Then, at a Ta of 77 °F (and 50%
RH), productivity began to decline in a
nearly perfect linear fashion (R2 = 0.99).
Therefore, the REF condition was
selected as a Ta of 77 °F and RH of 50%.
This combination yielded an HI of 76.8
°F for the REF condition.
EP30AU24.012
C. Productivity Loss Estimates by Group
EP30AU24.011
71008
71009
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
yielded an HI of 122.3 °F for the HOT
condition.
The productivity loss from the REF
condition to the HOT condition was
estimated. In table 2.3. (p. 11), the
authors reported that at the REF
(99 - 62)%
179.2 -122.3loF
* (80 - 79.2)°F HI
= 0.69o/co
0.69% * 480 minutes = 3.3 minutes
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 44.5 minutes.
* (90 - 79.2)°F HI= 9.27o/c
9.27% * 480 minutes= 44.5 minutes
O
Somanathan et al. (2021) assessed the
productivity of indoor workers in clothweaving, garment-sewing, and steel mill
industries in India. OSHA only
analyzed garment-sewing workers, who
were ‘‘paid monthly wages’’ (p. 1803),
and their productivity was assessed as
‘‘actual hourly output, when controlled
for the target [output]’’ from ‘‘103
sewing lines over a period of 730 days
during the calendar years of 2012 and
2013’’ (p. 1804). OSHA excluded
workers from the cloth weaving
industry because productivity was not
reported for the full range of
temperatures (Figure 1C, p. 1808).
OSHA also excluded certain garment
plants and the steel mill, as these
facilities were climate-controlled (p.
1806), and workers experienced limited
variations in temperature.
The authors reported productivity as
a function of daily maximum
temperature (Ta) in Figure 1 (p. 1808).
Temperature data came from
‘‘recordings from public weather
stations within the cities where . . .
garment-sewing factories are located’’
(p. 1806), i.e., the National Capital
Region (NCR), Hyderabad, and
Chhindwara. The authors created
temperature bins for each industry, as
well as the equivalent bins based on
wet-bulb temperature (WBT), which
accounts for both Ta and RH (appendix,
p. 3).
Garment-sewing
(inside NCR)
REF ........................................................
HOT ........................................................
Max ........................................................
Temperature bin
Equivalent
WBT bin
Temperature bin
<19 °C .............................
>33 °C .............................
>35 °C .............................
<15 °C .............................
>25.5 °C ..........................
>27 °C .............................
<27 °C .............................
>33 °C .............................
>35 °C .............................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
To calculate the HI for the REF
condition in the garment-sewing
industry, the Ta for the lowest bin was
used and RH was calculated using the
WBT
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
equation below (provided by the
authors). Inside the NCR, the Ta was
66.2 °F (19 °C) and RH was calculated
at 18%, yielding an HI of 63.4 °F for the
Equivalent
WBT bin
<23 °C.
>29 °C.
>31 °C.
REF condition. Outside the NCR, the Ta
was 80.6 °F (27 °C) and RH was
calculated as 56%, yielding an HI of 82
°F for the REF condition.
RH
( 17.27Ta ))
= 0.567Ta + 0.216 ( lOO
* 6.105 * exp 237 _7 + Ta
+ 3.38
To calculate the HI for the HOT
condition in the garment-sewing
industry, the Ta for the second highest
bin was used because this is where
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Garment-sewing
(outside NCR)
Jkt 262001
productivity losses reached a maximum
and plateaued (Figure 1A–B, p. 1808).
RH was again calculated using the
equation above. Inside the NCR, the Ta
PO 00000
Frm 00313
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
was 91.4 °F (33 °C) and RH was
calculated at 31%, yielding an HI of 90
°F for the HOT condition. Outside the
NCR, the Ta was also 91.4 °F (33 °C) and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.017
Relative to the REF condition (79.2 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) is 9.27%. For an
o.a 6 %
1°FHI
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 3.3 minutes.
EP30AU24.016
o.a 6 %
1°F HI
= 0.86% per 10F HI
EP30AU24.015
Relative to the REF condition (79.2 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the initial
heat trigger (80 °F HI) is 0.69%. For an
condition (Ta 80 °F, RH 30%),
productivity was 99%, and at the HOT
condition (Ta 110 °F, RH 30%),
productivity was 62%. This yielded a
rate of productivity loss of 0.86% per 1
°F HI.
EP30AU24.014
According to table 2.3. (p. 11), the
combination of temperature and
humidity that corresponded the greatest
productivity loss (38%) was a Ta of 110
°F and RH of 30%. This combination
71010
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
RH was calculated as 64%, yielding an
HI of 105.8 °F for the HOT condition.
The productivity losses from the REF
conditions to the HOT conditions were
estimated using data from Figure A.3
(appendix, p. 6). For garment workers
inside the NCR, the authors reported
that at the HOT condition, there was a
12% loss in productivity, which yields
a rate of 0.45% per 1 °F HI. Outside the
= 0.45% per 1°F HI
Inside NCR: l(ioo- 88 ~%
63.4-90 °F
NCR, the authors reported that at the
HOT condition, there was a 3% loss in
productivity, which yields a rate of
0.13% per 1 °F HI.
Outside NCR: (rno- 97 )%
l82-105.8l°F
=
0.13% per 1°F HI
Mean:
(0.4S+0.13)%per ioF HI=
0.29% per 1oF HI
2
Relative to the REF condition, inside
the NCR, productivity loss at the initial
heat trigger (80 °F HI) was 7.49%. For
Inside NCR:
an 8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 35.9 minutes.
Outside the NCR, productivity loss is
D.4S%
1°F HI
* (BO - 63.4)°F HI
=
assumed to be 0% because the REF (82
°F HI) was above the initial heat trigger.
The mean loss is 18.0 minutes.
7.49o/co 7.49% * 480 minutes
=
35.9 minutes
Outside NCR:
Mean ·.
Relative to the REF condition, inside
the NCR, productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) was 12.0%. For
(35.9+0) minutes
..;...__..;..._
__ =
2
lB . Ommu
. t es
an 8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 57.6 minutes.
Outside the NCR, productivity loss at
0 •45 %
1°F HI
Inside NCR:
0 minutes
* (90 - 63.4)°F HI
= 12.0o/cO
the high heat trigger was 1.0%, or a loss
of 4.8 minutes. The mean loss is 31.3
minutes.
12.0o/co * 480 minutes
=
5 7.6 minutes
Outside NCR:
0 •13 %
1°F HI
* (90 - 82)°F HI
=
1.04o/co
1.04% * 480 minutes
=
5.0 minutes
Ioannou et al. (2017) assessed the
effects of temperature on the
productivity of 7 grape-picking workers
in Cyprus over 4 study days: two in the
summer (August 17–18, 2016) and two
in the autumn (October 11–12, 2016).
The workers were ‘‘healthy and heatacclimatized’’ (p. 332), and their pay
system was not specified. They were
‘‘officially not provided with any breaks
other than the lunch break’’ (p. 338) but
did take ‘‘irregular work breaks . . .
defined as any unprescribed work
cessation determined by workers’ own
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
=
. t esII . Group 2 Stud'1es.
31 . 3 mmu
judgment, and not based on specific
time intervals or instructions’’ (p. 333).
Productivity was assessed as ‘‘the
number of boxes full of grapes picked by
the entire group in each hour divided by
the number of workers’’ (p. 333).
The authors reported hourly
productivity as a function of wet bulb
globe temperature (WBGT). The
calculation of WBGT was based on
weather data (including Ta and RH)
from the Paphos International Airport in
Cyprus. OSHA accessed the same
historical weather data
PO 00000
Frm 00314
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(wunderground.com) for the 4 study
days and calculated the hourly HI
(based on Ta and RH) for each study
day. On October 11 and 12, the highest
HI was still below the high heat trigger
(83.8 °F and 85.6 °F, respectively) and
would have required extrapolation to
estimate the rate of productivity loss.
Therefore, only weather and
productivity data from August 17 and
18 was considered. The lowest HI for
each day served as the REF condition
for that day; the REF HI for August 17
was 75.6 °F (based on a Ta of 75 °F and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.020
2
EP30AU24.019
(57.6+5.0) minutes
EP30AU24.018
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Mean:
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
73% RH), and the REF HI for August 18
was 72.1 °F (based on a Ta of 72 °F and
69% RH).
The highest HI for each day served as
the HOT condition. The HOT HI for
August 17 was 96.9 °F (based on a Ta
of 86 °F and 74% RH), and the HOT HI
August 17:
for August 18 was 103.1 °F (based on a
Ta of 88 °F and 75% RH).
The productivity loss from the REF
condition to the HOT condition for the
2 study days (August 17–18) was
estimated by plotting the hourly HI
against the productivity data (boxes per
(loo-a 6•1)% = 0.65o/c
Op
l75.6-96.9l°F
er 1 °F HI
71011
hour) in Figure 6 (p. 337). The rate of
productivity loss was 0.65% per 1 °F HI
for August 17, and 0.81% per 1 °F HI
on August 18, which yielded a mean
rate of 0.73% per 1 °F HI.
August 18:
(100-74.9)% _
172.1-103.1l°F
0.81 % per 1 °F HI
Mean:
Relative to the REF conditions, the
productivity loss at the initial heat
trigger (80 °F HI) was 2.87% for August
August 17:
(0.65+0.81)% per 1 oF
2
HI = 0. 73% per 1oF HI
17 and 6.40% for August 18. For an 8hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 13.8 and 30.7
~~:s~ * (80 - 75.6)°F HI = 2.87%
minutes, respectively, and a mean loss
of 22.3 minutes.
2.87% * 480 minutes =
13.8 minutes
August 18:
o.alo/o * (80 - 72.1)°F HI = 6.40o/c
1°F HI
O
6.40% * 480 minutes =
30.7 minutes
Mean ·.
. t es
(13.7+30.7)
minutes
..;..._
_ ____;_
_ _ = 22 .3 mmu
2
Relative to the REF conditions, the
productivity loss at the high heat trigger
(90 °F HI) was 9.40% for August 17 and
August 17:
0 ' 65 %
1°F HI
14.5% for August 18. For an 8-hour
work shift (480 minutes), this translates
to a loss of 45.1 and 69.6 minutes,
* (90 - 75.6)°F HI = 9.40o/c
O
respectively, and a mean loss of 57.4
minutes.
9.40% * 480 minutes =
45.1 minutes
August 18:
o.alo/o * (90 - 72.1)°F HI = 14.5o/co
1°F HI
14.5% * 480 minutes =
2
Sahu et al. (2013) assessed the effects
of temperature on the productivity of 48
male rice harvesters in Bengal, India
from April to June in 2011. Workers
were paid on a piece-rate system, and
their acclimatization status was not
specified. They were allowed to take
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
‘‘small breaks (3–6 min) between work
tasks [that] were included as part of the
normal work time management’’ (p.
426). Productivity was assessed as the
‘‘hourly number of bundles divided by
the number of workers to calculate the
average hourly productivity per worker’’
PO 00000
Frm 00315
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(p. 426). The authors measured both Ta
and WBGT in the farm fields and
estimated the relationship between
them (Figure 1, p. 427).
The authors only reported
productivity as a function of WBGT
(Figure 4, p. 428). First, the WBGT when
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.022
. t es
(45.1+69.6) minutes
- - - - - = 57 .4 mmu
EP30AU24.021
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Mean ·.
EP30AU24.023
69.6 minutes
71012
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
productivity was highest (25.7 °C) and
lowest (30.9 °C) was identified. Then
the regression equation from Figure 1
was used to estimate Ta based on
WBGT. Finally, to estimate RH,
historical weather data ‘‘from the nearby
weather station at Kolkata Dum-Dum
airport’’ (p. 426) was used, upon which
the authors had also relied. OSHA
identified the days from April through
June 2011 that matched the Ta for
highest productivity (80.6 °F) and
lowest productivity (97.4 °F) at 6 a.m.
(when Ta was measured for the first
hour of work), and then used the
corresponding level of RH. This yielded
an HI of 85.5 °F for the REF condition
(based on a Ta of 80.6 °F and 80% RH),
and an HI of 116.6 °F for the HOT
condition (based on a Ta of 97.4 °F and
56% RH).
OSHA estimated productivity loss
from the REF condition to the HOT
condition based on the productivity
data (rice bundles per hour) for the first
hour of work in Figure 4 (p. 428).
Workers harvested 92 rice bundles per
hour at the REF condition (i.e., 100%
productivity), and 63.8 bundles per
hour at the HOT condition (i.e., 69%
productivity). This yielded a rate of
productivity loss of 1.00% per 1 °F HI.
(100 - 69)%
185.5 - 116.6loF = 1.00% per 1 oF HI
The productivity loss at the initial
heat trigger (80 °F HI) is assumed to be
0% because the REF condition, at which
productivity was assumed to be 100%,
is higher than the initial heat trigger.
Relative to the REF condition (85.5 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) is 4.50%. For an
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 21.6 minutes.
::~0: * (90 - 85.5)°F HI= 4.50% 4.50% * 480 minutes= 21.6 minutes
III. Group 3 Studies
Dally et al. (2018) assessed the effects
of temperature on the productivity of
4,095 sugarcane cutters in Guatemala
from November 2015 to May 2016.
Workers received ‘‘a base wage
regardless of the amount of sugarcane
harvested’’ (p. 3) and were acclimatized
(i.e., they completed a ‘‘one week
acclimatization period in November’’ (p.
3). They worked a ‘‘ten-hour shift (p. 3)
and were allowed to ‘‘take three 20minute breaks and one 60-minute lunch
break in the provided shade during the
work shift’’ (p. 4). The authors reported
daily productivity as the ‘‘average daily
tons cut per workday’’ (p. 4). The
authors collected data on Ta, RH, and
WBGT using the Cengicaña weather
station located close to the sugarcane
fields.
Using historical weather data
(collected at 15-minute intervals) from
the Cengicaña weather station, Ta and
RH were used to calculate HI for each
day of the harvest season. OSHA
identified the days with the highest and
lowest HI based on the 75th percentile
of each day, which provided the range
of temperatures that most closely
corresponded to the extreme values of
daily productivity (as compared with
mean HI or max HI). This yielded an HI
of 88.3 °F for the REF condition and an
HI of 102.6 °F for the HOT condition.
The productivity loss from the REF
condition to the HOT condition was
estimated based on the productivity
data (tons of sugarcane per day) in
Figure 2 (p. 7). Workers harvested 6.0
tons per day at the REF condition (i.e.,
100% productivity), and 5.42 tons per
day at the HOT condition (i.e., 90.3%
productivity). This yielded a rate of
productivity loss of 0.68% per 1 °F HI.
(100 - 90.3)%
188.3 - 1O2.6loF = 0.68% per 1 oF HI
11.1%
7.3%
Proposed Rule:
35 mi~
480mm
= 1.52
0.68% * 1.52 = 1.03% per 1°F HI
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00316
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
= 7.3%
EP30AU24.027
= 11.1%
EP30AU24.026
6 omi~
540mm
percentages of the work shift spent in
breaks for these two scenarios. This
yielded an adjusted rate of productivity
loss of 1.03% per 1 °F HI.
EP30AU24.025
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Dally et al. (2018):
breaks and 5 minutes of rest breaks if
needed) over the course of an 8-hour
work shift at the high heat trigger.
Therefore, OSHA assumed that the rate
of productivity loss should be
multiplied by 1.52, or the ratio of the
30AUP2
EP30AU24.024
However, the sugarcane cutters were
given a total of 60 minutes of rest breaks
(3x20 minutes) over the course of a 9hour work shift, while the proposed rule
would require a total of 35 minutes of
rest breaks (2x15-minute scheduled rest
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Relative to the REF condition (88.3 °F
HI), the productivity loss at the high
heat trigger (90 °F HI) is 1.75%. For an
1.o 3 %
1°F HI
8-hour work shift (480 minutes), this
translates to a loss of 8.4 minutes.
* (90 - 88.3)°F HI= 1.75%
O
III. Findings of Primary Approach
This appendix presents OSHA’s
estimates of the labor productivity loss
resulting from pacing (i.e., working
slowly during the work time not spent
on breaks) when the heat index is equal
to the initial and high heat triggers. This
appendix also presents OSHA’s
estimates of the decrease in pacing with
the introduction of if-needed and
scheduled breaks—the findings of the
primary approach suggest that
employees pace less (i.e., work more
efficiently) with if-needed rest breaks,
and that scheduled rest breaks further
reduce pacing (i.e., employees become
even more efficient). These estimated
labor productivity losses from pacing
were translated to and presented as
equivalent lost minutes of work time in
an 8-hour work shift.
At the initial heat trigger, employees
given if-needed rest breaks are estimated
to pace less (i.e., work more efficiently)
by an average of 2.8 minutes (per 8-hour
shift) compared to those not given ifneeded rest breaks. At the high heat
trigger, employees given both scheduled
and if-needed rest breaks are estimated
to pace less (i.e., work more efficiently)
by an average of 32.2 minutes (per 8hour shift) compared to those not given
neither if-needed nor scheduled rest
breaks and by an average of 31.1
minutes (per 8-hour shift) compared to
those given only if-needed rest breaks.
IV. Alternate Approaches Under
Consideration
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that the assumptions made in the
71013
1.75% * 480 minutes= 8.4 minutes
primary approach are plausible and
appropriate. However, OSHA recognizes
that the limited scope of available
evidence affects the extent to which
these key assumptions can be tested. For
example, none of the available studies
directly compared rest break policies in
the same setting, so the estimates of cost
savings are based on differences in
productivity losses across settings.
OSHA is considering alternate
approaches with varying assumptions,
such as the extent to which productivity
losses in one setting, given a certain rest
break policy, may be representative of
such losses in other settings.
One alternate approach modifies some
of the key assumptions made in the
primary approach, while still relying on
the same set of studies. Specifically, this
approach retains Assumptions (a)
through (d) and Assumption (f), but it
replaces Assumption (e) with the
following:
e.1. An employee’s expected
productivity loss from pacing, given a
specific temperature and the employer’s
break policy, is estimated by taking the
average REF condition observed in
studies where that break policy is in
effect, along with the average
productivity loss per degree observed
across all studies.
e.2. An employee’s expected
productivity gains from taking rest
breaks do not exceed the productivity
losses that are observed when they work
at a slower pace and do not take rest
breaks. In other words, if a rest break
policy yielded an overall net increase in
productivity, employers would already
offer these rest breaks. Gains can be
estimated by differences in productivity
losses due to pacing, as measured at the
initial temperature (i.e., trigger) at
which the rest break policy goes into
effect.
Compared with those of the primary
approach, the above alternate
assumptions are more relaxed in some
ways and stronger in others. In
particular, the assumption that
productivity losses per degree are
estimated in a pooled fashion, but REF
conditions are not, implies that all
productivity gains associated from
reduced pacing come in the form of a
shift in the productivity loss function.
This assumption addresses the potential
concern that differences in work
conditions other than temperature (such
as sun exposure or work demands) limit
the applicability of any findings on
productivity loss to other work settings.
Under this alternate approach, OSHA
expects that productivity losses at the
initial and high heat triggers will be
larger for employees in Group 1, and
they will be smaller for employees in
Groups 2 and 3 (see table VIII.H.A.2).115
This means that under these
assumptions, even greater cost savings
could accrue to employers if they
offered rest breaks if needed at the
initial heat trigger, and scheduled rest
breaks as well as if-needed rest breaks
at the high heat trigger. OSHA welcomes
feedback on this alternate approach and
has not yet calculated how it would
impact the total cost of the proposed
standard.
Group
HI at REF
(average within group)
1 ..........................................................
2 ..........................................................
3 ..........................................................
73.7 °F ................................................
79.7 °F ................................................
88.3 °F ................................................
Productivity
loss per 1°F
HI above REF
(pooled average for
all groups)
(%)
Productivity loss at
initial heat trigger
(min.)
0.71
0.71
0.71
21.5
1.0
0
Productivity
loss at high
heat trigger
(min.)
55.6
35.1
5.8
The average HI at REF uses the midpoint for each study in cases where a range was specified. The average productivity loss is the pooled
average from table VIII.H.A.1.
115 Not reflected in table VIII.H.A.2 is the
possibility that the exclusion criteria listed in table
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
VIII.H.A.3 may need to be reconsidered if the cost
savings estimation approach is revised.
PO 00000
Frm 00317
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.028
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE VIII.H.A.2—SUMMARY TABLE OF ALTERNATE APPROACH
71014
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
In both the primary approach and the
secondary approach (immediately
above), the REF condition—which is,
loosely, the minimum temperature at
which heat begins to cause productivity
loss—is assumed to differ across
Groups. The two estimation approaches
diverge in that the per-degree rate of
loss in conditions above REF is always
0.71% in the secondary approach but is
allowed to differ by Group in the
primary.116 A tertiary approach would
reverse which parameter is estimated in
a pooled manner; the REF condition
would be the same across Groups, while
the per-degree rate of loss would differ.
As shown in table VIII.H.A.1., however,
the per-degree rate of loss is estimated
to increase with amounts of rest, so this
approach would yield an estimate of
productivity-related costs, rather than
cost savings. Although this result is not
plausible, it illustrates some of the
uncertainties about data and
quantitative methods used in this
appendix.
A pooled regression could address
some of these challenges by producing
a single estimate representing the
relationship between temperature and
productivity loss that does not differ by
break policy, then separately producing
estimates as to how each rest break
policy might improve productivity.
OSHA is considering an additional
alternate approach that would
incorporate regression analysis and
might, as part of such analysis, relax the
assumption regarding the linearity of
the relationship between temperature
and productivity loss. That is, a
nonlinear specification could address
the potential concern that productivity
losses may become increasingly severe
as the temperature exceeds the initial
heat and high heat triggers.
In sum, OSHA welcomes feedback on
the primary cost savings approach and
the alternate approaches. OSHA also
welcomes suggestions for other
approaches to estimate cost savings
related to the provision of rest breaks.
TABLE VIII.H.A.3—STUDIES EXCLUDED FROM PACING ESTIMATES, GROUPED BY REASON FOR EXCLUSION
Study
identified by
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Study, listed as author(s) and year
Did not measure temperature conditions (n=2):
Hostler et al., 2016 ................................................................................................................................................................
O’Neill et al., 2013 .................................................................................................................................................................
Assumed outdoor (forecasted) conditions applied to indoor workers (n=2):
Cai et al., 2018 ......................................................................................................................................................................
Adhvaryu et al., 2020 .............................................................................................................................................................
Temperature conditions did not vary (n=5):
Schlader et al., 2011 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Uchiyama et al., 2022 ............................................................................................................................................................
Schranner et al., 2017 ...........................................................................................................................................................
Constable et al., 1994 ............................................................................................................................................................
Morrissey-Bassler et al., 2024 ...............................................................................................................................................
Temperature range was entirely below the initial heat trigger (n=3).
Van Cutsem et al., 2015 (HI of 77°F for HOT condition) ......................................................................................................
Federspiel et al., 2004 (HI of 78.8°F for HOT condition) ......................................................................................................
Niemelä et al., 2002 (HI of 77.2°F for HOT condition) ..........................................................................................................
Temperature range was entirely above the high heat trigger (n=3):
Meegahapola and Prabodanie, 2018 (HI of 90.1°F for REF condition) ................................................................................
Wyndham, 1969 (HI of 97.5°F for REF condition) ................................................................................................................
Ismail, 2009 (HI of 92°F for REF condition) ..........................................................................................................................
Unable to reproduce temperature data (n=2):
Masuda et al., 2021 ...............................................................................................................................................................
Sett and Sahu, 2014 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Review studies, no empirical productivity data (n=15):
Ioannou et al., 2022 ...............................................................................................................................................................
Borg et al., 2021 ....................................................................................................................................................................
Dasgupta et al., 2021 ............................................................................................................................................................
Morrissey et al., 2021a ..........................................................................................................................................................
Morrissey et al., 2021b ..........................................................................................................................................................
Foster et al., 2020 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Morris et al., 2020a ................................................................................................................................................................
Morris et al., 2020b ................................................................................................................................................................
Day et al., 2019 .....................................................................................................................................................................
Flouris et al., 2018 .................................................................................................................................................................
Lundgren et al., 2013 .............................................................................................................................................................
Seppänen et al., 2006 ...........................................................................................................................................................
Pilcher et al., 2002 .................................................................................................................................................................
Hancock et al., 2007 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Lai et al., 2023 .......................................................................................................................................................................
Modelling studies, no empirical productivity data (n=19):
Casey et al., 2021 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Szewczyk et al., 2021 ............................................................................................................................................................
Atlantic Council/Vivid Economics 2021a ...............................................................................................................................
Atlantic Council/Vivid Economics 2021b ...............................................................................................................................
Atlantic Council/Vivid Economics 2017 .................................................................................................................................
Bröde et al., 2018 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Takakura et al., 2017 .............................................................................................................................................................
116 However, allowing heterogeneity in the
reference temperature has support in the literature;
see Heutel et al. (2021).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00318
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022a.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
OSHA.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022a.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022a.
71015
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.H.A.3—STUDIES EXCLUDED FROM PACING ESTIMATES, GROUPED BY REASON FOR EXCLUSION—Continued
Study
identified by
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Study, listed as author(s) and year
Carleton and Hsiang, 2016 ....................................................................................................................................................
Costa et al., 2016 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Yi and Chan, 2015 .................................................................................................................................................................
House et al., 2003 .................................................................................................................................................................
Kjellstrom et al., 2009a ..........................................................................................................................................................
Koehn and Brown, 1985 ........................................................................................................................................................
Srinavin and Mohamed, 2003 ................................................................................................................................................
International Labour Organization, 2019 ...............................................................................................................................
Kjellstrom et al., 2016a ..........................................................................................................................................................
Kjellstrom et al., 2009b ..........................................................................................................................................................
Kjellstrom et al., 2017 ............................................................................................................................................................
Kjellstrom et al., 2016b ..........................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was heat strain (n=5):
Wyndham, 1965 .....................................................................................................................................................................
Kalkowsky and Kampmann, 2006 .........................................................................................................................................
Miller et al., 2011 ...................................................................................................................................................................
Ioannou et al., 2021a .............................................................................................................................................................
Kaltsatou et al., 2020 .............................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was physical activity or maximum work capacity (n=2):
Mix et al., 2019 ......................................................................................................................................................................
Maresh et al., 2014 ................................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was cognitive performance (n=3):
Fine and Kobrick, 1987 ..........................................................................................................................................................
Mazlomi et al., 2017 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Spector et al., 2018 ...............................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was heat-related injuries (n=1):
Park et al., 2021 ....................................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was loss of labor supply (including missed work hours) (n=2):
Neidell et al., 2021 (ATUS) ....................................................................................................................................................
Graff-Zivin and Neidell, 2014 (ATUS) ....................................................................................................................................
Outcome was non-working time (n=5):
Flouris et al., 2020 (unplanned break time) ..........................................................................................................................
Ioannou et al., 2021b (unplanned break time) ......................................................................................................................
Yi and Chan, 2017 (non-productive time) .............................................................................................................................
Li et al., 2016 (idle time) ........................................................................................................................................................
Zhao et al., 2009 (heat tolerance time) .................................................................................................................................
Outcome was payroll or income data (n=3):
Deryugina and Hsiang, 2014 .................................................................................................................................................
Park, 2016 ..............................................................................................................................................................................
Heal and Park, 2013 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was crop yields (n=1):
Houser et al., 2014 ................................................................................................................................................................
Outcome was firm-level output (no worker-level data available) (n=1):
Cachon et al., 2012 ...............................................................................................................................................................
Productivity losses were self-reported (e.g., surveys, focus groups) (n=9):
Krishnamurthy et al., 2017 .....................................................................................................................................................
Zander et al., 2015 ................................................................................................................................................................
Langkulsen et al., 2010 .........................................................................................................................................................
Fahed et al., 2018 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Budhathoki and Zander, 2019 ...............................................................................................................................................
Singh et al., 2015 ...................................................................................................................................................................
Pogačar et al., 2019 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Morera et al., 2020 ................................................................................................................................................................
Wadsworth et al., 2019 ..........................................................................................................................................................
Provided single productivity estimate for a range of temperatures (n=6):
Sadiq et al., 2019 ...................................................................................................................................................................
Hansson et al., 2024 ..............................................................................................................................................................
Glaser et al., 2022 .................................................................................................................................................................
Prince et al., 2020 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Wegman et al., 2018 .............................................................................................................................................................
Bodin et al., 2016 ...................................................................................................................................................................
Provided single productivity estimate for multiple worksites with different conditions (n=2):
Stevens, 2017 ........................................................................................................................................................................
Gun and Budd, 1995 .............................................................................................................................................................
Productivity data not comparable; workers observed or total work time varied (n=3):
Sawka et al., 2015 .................................................................................................................................................................
Nag et al., 2006 .....................................................................................................................................................................
Morrison, 1969 .......................................................................................................................................................................
Productivity data for firefighting tasks only (n=2):
Larsen et al., 2015 .................................................................................................................................................................
Sol et al., 2021 .......................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00319
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ERG 2022a.
OSHA.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022b.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022a.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022a.
2022a.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022b.
ERG 2022b.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
OSHA.
OSHA.
OSHA.
ERG 2022c.
ERG 2022c.
71016
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.H.A.3—STUDIES EXCLUDED FROM PACING ESTIMATES, GROUPED BY REASON FOR EXCLUSION—Continued
Study
identified by
Study, listed as author(s) and year
Provided breaks but did not specify type (scheduled vs. if-needed) or duration/frequency (n=4):
Mitchell et al., 2018 ................................................................................................................................................................
Quiller et al., 2017 .................................................................................................................................................................
Ciuha et al., 2019 ..................................................................................................................................................................
Pan et al., 2021 .....................................................................................................................................................................
Used work-time shifting instead of breaks (n=1):
Morabito et al., 2020 ..............................................................................................................................................................
I. Appendix B. Review of Literature on
Effects of Heat Exposure on Non-Health
Outcomes
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
I. Introduction
A large literature from multiple
disciplines (economics, occupational
health, physiology) documents the
negative effects of heat exposure on
human health, such as mortality,
injuries, and illnesses (for detailed
discussion, see Section IV., Health
Effects and Section V.A., Risk
Assessment).
There is also a large literature that
documents the negative effects of heat
exposure on a broad range of non-health
outcomes with potential economic
implications (Heal and Park, 2016; Lai
et al., 2023).
This document serves several
purposes. First, this document
synthesizes and summarizes the
findings from multiple disciplines
regarding the effects of heat exposure on
non-health outcomes with potential
economic implications. In particular,
this document aims to examine a broad
set of non-health outcomes that are
potentially relevant to OSHA’s
economic analysis for the proposed
standard for Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work
Settings. Although the discussion
centers around labor productivity, other
outcomes are also discussed, including
but not limited to labor supply, mental
performance, economic output, and
worker utility. This document also aims
to clarify terminology, given that
different terms have been used
interchangeably in the existing literature
(Dasgupta et al., 2021, p. e457).117
117 For example, Burke et al. (2023) conducted a
meta-analysis of 22 studies as part of their literature
review of existing evidence of ‘‘labor productivity
response to temperature.’’ Some of these studies
reported effects on mental performance or effects on
economic output without clearly delineating the
contribution of labor productivity. Changes in
mental performance (e.g., error rates) may not
directly reflect the magnitude of changes in labor
productivity; for example, a 50% decrease in the
error rate does not necessarily mean a 50% increase
in labor productivity (Fisk, 2000, pp. 555–556).
Flouris et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis of
111 studies on the effects of heat exposure on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Studies summarized in this document
were identified as follows. Eastern
Research Group (ERG) performed
several literature searches (ERG, 2022a;
ERG, 2022b; ERG, 2022c) that could
inform the relationship between heat
and various outcomes (e.g., labor
productivity, heat strain). Among these
studies, studies reporting non-health
outcomes were considered relevant.
Studies reporting health outcomes like
heat strain and work-related HRIs were
not considered relevant, and readers are
referred to relevant sections of the
preamble for more detail. OSHA also
independently identified additional
studies pertaining to non-health
outcomes. During this process, studies
about general population-related
outcomes (e.g., heat-related mortality for
general population beyond workers)
were considered irrelevant.
This document is organized as
follows. Section VIII.I.II. summarizes
the literature’s findings on the negative
effects of heat exposure on non-health
outcomes with potential economic
implications, especially labor
productivity. Section VIII.I.III.
summarizes the literature’s findings on
the role of workplace characteristics in
the labor productivity effects of heat
exposure. Section VIII.I.IV. concludes.
II. Effect of Heat Exposure on NonHealth Outcomes
This section summarizes the
literature’s findings on the negative
effects of heat exposure on non-health
outcomes that could translate into
economic costs: labor supply, labor
productivity, mental performance,
economic output, and worker utility.118
workers’ outcomes, 11 of which were related to
‘‘productivity loss.’’ Some of these studies reported
effects on self-perceived labor productivity or labor
supply.
118 In general, the findings in this appendix (and
other PEA sections that discuss benefits that are
excluded from the primary benefits quantification)
may be interrelated, such that simply summing the
effects identified could lead to some amount of
double-counting or other mis-counting.
PO 00000
Frm 00320
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
ERG
ERG
ERG
ERG
2022c.
2022c.
2022c.
2022a.
OSHA.
A. Labor Supply
Literature has documented the
negative effects of heat exposure on
labor supply (hours worked), by
increasing absenteeism due to illness or
injury (Ioannou et al., 2022, p. 80) or
increasing disutility of labor (working in
the heat causes discomfort so workers
increasingly avoid spending time at
work at higher temperatures) (Lai et al.,
2023, p. 222).
Many studies found that heat
exposure increased absenteeism due to
illness or injury in their evaluation of
multiple types of health information
datasets, such as workers’
compensations claims data, emergency
department visits and hospital discharge
datasets (for more detail, see Section IV.,
Health Effects and Section V.A., Risk
Assessment).
Many studies in the economics
literature found evidence that heat
exposure led workers to allocate less
hours to work (potentially due to
absenteeism from illness or injury,
increased disutility of work, or both).
Graff Zivin and Neidell (2014) used data
from the American Time Use Survey
(ATUS) to find that workers in ‘‘highrisk industries’’ (agriculture, forestry,
fishing, hunting, mining, construction,
manufacturing, transportation, utilities)
reduced their time allocated to labor by
one hour when daily maximum ambient
temperatures exceeded 85 °F (29.4 °C)
compared to the 76 °F–80 °F (24.4 °C–
26.7°C) range. Almost all the decrease in
the time allocated to labor happened at
the end of the day when fatigue from
prolonged exposure to heat has likely
set in. They also found that that most of
the decreased time allocated to labor
was diverted to indoor leisure. They did
not find evidence that workers worked
longer during cooler days to make up for
reduced work hours during hot days.
Rode et al. (2022) compiled time use
and labor force survey data from seven
countries (Brazil, France, India, Mexico,
Spain, UK, USA) and found that a day
at daily maximum ambient temperature
104 °F (40 °C) lead to 28.65 fewer
minutes worked per worker compared
to a day at 80.6 °F (27 °C) for ‘‘high-risk
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
industries’’ (agriculture, mining,
construction, manufacturing); the
corresponding decline was insignificant
for workers in ‘‘low-risk industries’’ (p.
21). Garg et al. (2020a) found in Chinese
time use survey data that an additional
day with an average ambient
temperature above 80 °F (26.7 °C)
reduced weekly work time by 1.2 hours.
They also found limited evidence for
this reduced work time being
substituted by increased non-work time
such as time spent on childcare and
household chores.119
The effect of heat exposure on labor
supply likely depends on the incentive
structures 120 for these workers and their
economic dependence on the income
arising from their work (Lai et al., 2023).
Using daily attendance records from
selected manufacturing firms in India,
Somanathan et al. (2021) found that
elevated temperatures in the current or
preceding week reduced labor
supply 121 (which the authors
interpreted as possibly both increased
absenteeism from illness or injury and
increased disutility of labor), and the
effect was stronger for workers with
paid leave. Such dependence on
specific incentive structures might
explain the differences in results across
studies. For example, Cai et al. (2018)
examined worker attendance data from
administrative records and found that
neither the attendance decision nor the
working hours of workers in a
manufacturing facility in China were
affected by temperature, likely because
the workers were paid by piece-rate.
Neidell et al. (2021) found in ATUS data
that the relationship between hours
worked and temperature depended on
overall economic conditions. They
found that during economic expansions,
each additional degree above daily
maximum ambient temperature 90 °F
(32.2 °C) reduced the average workday
by 2.6 minutes. On the other hand, no
significant relationship was found
between temperature and hours worked
during economic recessions. Such lack
of evidence of reduction in work hours
on hotter days during weak labor market
conditions suggests that the negative
119 The authors found that higher temperatures
reduce time spent on childcare by households
without cooling technology (insignificant effect on
households with cooling technology). They also
found that higher temperatures reduce time spent
on childcare by women (insignificant effect for
men).
120 The role of workplace incentives in the labor
productivity effects of heat exposure is discussed
later in section VIII.I.III.B.
121 This study’s worker attendance data
technically measures only whether the worker is
present or absent that day (Somanathan et al., 2021,
p. 1811). It is unclear if and how their attendance
data captures cases where the worker is only
partially present, and leaves work early that day.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
relationship between temperature and
work hours is likely driven by changes
in labor supply (from worker) rather
than labor demand (from employer).
There are several reasons for the need
for caution in interpreting the studies
reporting effects of heat exposure on
labor supply (or employment in
general).
First, the results presented in most of
these studies could be driven by
changes in labor demand as well as
labor supply (Graff Zivin and Neidell,
2014, p. 4). Some studies did try to
differentiate labor supply and demand,
such as estimating the effect across
business cycles (Neidell et al., 2021) or
estimating wage effects as well as
employment effects (e.g., Colmer, 2021;
Jessoe et al., 2018).
Second, most economics studies
reporting the negative effect of heat
exposure on labor supply using data on
hours worked did not disentangle the
contribution of absenteeism due to
illness or injury from the contribution of
disutility from working in the heat. The
distinction is important because
improving workplace conditions may
increase labor supply beyond reducing
time lost to illness or injury.
Third, it is not very clear if reduced
work time always has negative
implications for worker welfare.
Reduced work time on hot days such as
cessation of work might be beneficial for
workers if fewer workers are exposed to
high temperatures that put their health
at risk (Ireland et al., 2024, p. 18).
However, if the lost work time is not
compensated, workers face a tradeoff
between health risk and earnings risk,
both of which negatively affects the
workers’ welfare (EPA, 2021, p. F–3).
Rode et al. (2022)’s theoretical
framework also presented a similar
tradeoff facing workers between
decreased earnings and increased
disutility of labor in face of higher
temperatures. Their theoretical
framework is based on their
interpretation of their empiricallyestimated decline in labor supply due to
higher temperatures (discussed above)
as uncompensated lost work time—
workers choose to work less due to
increased disutility of labor but at the
cost of foregoing earnings. Based on this
theoretical framework, they derived the
willingness-to-pay to avoid the
increased disutility of labor from higher
temperatures (defined as the increase in
the wage rate that is needed to offset the
increased disutility of labor).
Fourth, the definition of work hours
varies by dataset. Some datasets
include, for example, paid or unpaid
leave (Somanathan et al., 2021) or while
other datasets include time spent on job
PO 00000
Frm 00321
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71017
search 122 (studies that use the ATUS
such as Graff Zivin and Neidell, 2014;
Neidell et al., 2021; Rode et al., 2022).
How work hours are defined has
implications for the worker welfare
effects of heat exposure. For example, as
discussed above, worker welfare could
depend on whether the reduced work
hours from heat exposure are
compensated (e.g., worker leaves work
early forgoing pay versus using paid
leave). See Eldridge et al. (2022) for
more examples of various definitions of
work hours across datasets.
B. Labor Productivity
Numerous studies have documented
the negative effects of heat exposure on
labor productivity. Using direct
measures of labor productivity (units of
output produced per hour) and proxies
of labor productivity (physical work
capacity, physical activity, and selfperceived labor productivity), studies
across various disciplines (e.g.,
physiology, occupational health, and
economics) have found that heat
exposure reduces labor productivity
(Ioannou et al., 2022; Morrissey et al.,
2021a; Mattke et al., 2007).
This section focuses on micro-level
evidence across various disciplines
based on laboratory or occupational
settings. Studies reporting potential
macro-level evidence on labor
productivity based on macroeconomic
proxies of labor productivity (e.g., per
capita value added, revenue, payroll)
are discussed in section VIII.I.II.D.
Overall, studies reported varying
estimates of effects of heat exposure on
labor productivity depending on the
specific sectors and heat conditions
(e.g., presence of indoor radiant heat,
differences in regional climate between
the U.S. and non-U.S. countries).
Section VIII.I.III. discuses in more detail
workplace factors that affect the
literature’s estimates of the effect of heat
exposure on labor productivity, such as
contractual structures and adaptation
measures that affect workers’ incentives
and ability to be productive in the heat.
122 Using the ATUS and following the ‘‘same
methodology employed by’’ Graff Zivin and Neidell
(2014). Neidell et al. (2021) defined ‘‘work’’ as ‘‘all
activities under the ‘work and work-related
activities’ major category,’’ which ‘‘in addition to
time spent at the workplace, [. . .] also includes
time devoted to other income-generating activities
as well as job searching’’ (p. 2). Rode et al. (2022)
also uses the same category to calculate time spent
on work: ‘‘Total work is calculated as the sum of
all time spent engaged in sub-activities listed under
Category 5, Work and Work-Related Activities.
Relevant sub-categories include time spent in work
itself, income-generating activities, socializing as a
part of work, job searching, and other miscellaneous
work-related activities’’ (p. 52).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71018
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
I. Direct Measures of Labor Productivity
Labor productivity is a ‘‘measure of
economic performance that compares
the amount of goods and services
produced (output) with the amount of
labor hours worked to produce that
output’’ and is a ‘‘ratio of output to
hours worked’’ (BLS, 2020a). Changes in
labor productivity ‘‘reflect the changes
in output that is not explained by the
change in hours worked’’ (BLS, 2020a).
Studies have documented the effects of
heat exposure on labor productivity in
different work settings in both U.S. and
non-U.S. countries. Most of these
studies are occupational studies with
the exception of one laboratory-based
study involving simulated work.
Some studies discussed in this section
technically reported changes in an
average worker’s output per day or
week, not output per hour. These
studies are discussed in this section in
the context of labor productivity based
on their evidence that changes in their
reported outcomes are likely being
driven by changes in worker output per
hour, not by changes in daily or weekly
hours worked.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. Agriculture.
Many studies analyzing the labor
productivity effects of heat exposure are
based on agricultural work settings,
given the agricultural sector’s high level
of heat exposure and the feasibility of
tracking individual production levels.
Using daily production data of Indian
rice harvesters, Sahu et al. (2013)
reported a 5% decline in labor
productivity (rice bundles per worker
per hour) for each additional degree
above 26 °C WBGT. Using daily
production data of sugarcane cutters in
Nicaragua, Hansson et al. (2024)
reported that relative to below 82.4 °F
(28 °C) WBGT, labor productivity
(bundles per worker per day) decreased
by 2.5% at 82.4 °F–84.2 °F (28 °C–29 °C)
WBGT, by 5% at 86 °F–87.8 °F (30 °C–
31 °C) WBGT, and by 8.3% at above
87.8 °F (31 °C) WBGT. Using daily
production data of maize farmers in
Nigeria, Sadiq et al. (2019) reported that
for every 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in
WBGT, labor productivity (ridges tilled
or hoed per worker per hectare)
decreased by 23% although their
reported labor productivity effects of
higher temperature could be
confounded by the effects of fatigue over
the workday. Using daily production
data of sheep shearers and retrospective
temperature records of a ‘‘Bureau of
Meteorology recording station’’ in
Australia, Gun and Budd (1995)
reported that the labor productivity
(number of sheep shorn per worker per
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
hour) declined by approximately 7%
per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in ambient
temperature 123 although the estimated
effect was not statistically significant.
Using daily production data of
Guatemalan sugarcane workers, Dally et
al. (2018) reported that a day with 95th
percentile WBGT of 34 °C was
associated with an estimated cumulative
loss in labor productivity of 0.59 tons of
cut sugarcane per worker per day over
the following five days compared to a
day with 95th percentile WBGT of 29 °C
(approximately 0.59/5.7=10.35% of the
average production per worker per day).
Based on data from tree fruit
harvesters in Washington State, Quiller
et al. (2017) found that increasing daily
maximum WBGT was associated with
decreasing labor productivity (weight of
fruit bins collected per worker per
hour). However, this association became
statistically insignificant after
controlling for potential confounders
such as price paid per bin and shift
duration. The lack of evidence could
also be due to relatively cool climate of
Washington State—the time-weighted
average WBGT was 72.1 °F (22.3 °C) and
60.6 °F (15.9 °C) in each of the months
studied.
b. Manufacturing
Several studies that directly measure
labor productivity are based on
manufacturing settings, likely due to
feasibility of tracking individual
production levels.
Using daily production data from a
non-climate-controlled paper cup
manufacturing setting in China, Cai et
al. (2018) reported that daily maximum
ambient temperatures above 95 °F (35
°C) resulted in an approximately 8.5%
decrease in labor productivity (output
per worker per day) relative to the
baseline range of 75 °F–79 °F (23.9 °C–
26.1 °C). Using daily production data
from a rubber compound manufacturing
plant in Sri Lanka, Meegahapola and
Prabodanie (2018) reported that high
temperature ranges, 105.8 °F–113 °F (41
°C–45 °C) and 96.8 °F–104 °F (36 °C–40
°C), reduced labor productivity
(kilogram per worker per hour), by 22%
and 18% respectively, relative to the
baseline temperature range of 89.6 °F–
95 °F (32 °C–35 °C). Using weekly
production data of brick molders and
carriers in India, Sett and Sahu (2014)
found that for each 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase
in ambient temperature, labor
productivity (number of bricks molded
or carried per worker per week)
declined by 0.8%. Using daily workerlevel production data from selected
123 This corresponds to a linear approximation of
the results presented in Figure 5 of the study.
PO 00000
Frm 00322
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
manufacturing firms in India,
Somanathan et al. (2021) found that
labor productivity (output per worker
per day) declines in higher outdoor
temperatures, falling 2.7% per 1.8 °F (1
°C) increase in daily maximum ambient
temperature above 77 °F (25 °C).
c. Other Sectors
Direct units of output are harder to
measure in most other sectors, so
comparatively fewer studies have been
produced in other industries.
Observing call center workers in
California, Federspiel et al. (2004) found
that time to finish tasks (post-talk wrapup to process information) increased by
16% when the ambient temperature
increased from 73.4 °F to 77.7 °F (23 °C
to 25.4 °C). Niemelä et al. (2002) also
analyzed workers at two call centers. In
one call center, they compared labor
productivity (number of calls per hour)
between two different temperature
zones in the building. In another cell
center, they introduced an intervention
(installation of air-conditioning) and
compared labor productivity before and
after the intervention. They reported
that labor productivity in both call
centers decreased by 5% to 7% at
ambient temperatures over 77 °F (25 °C),
although other seasonal changes likely
confounded their results. From data on
Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS)
interviewers from 46 developing
countries, LoPalo (2023) estimated the
effects of heat exposure on DHS
interviewers’ labor productivity
(number of surveys completed per
hour). Exploiting variation in weather
within a region of a country, survey
waves, and interviewers, they found
interviews per hour were fewer by
13.6% on days over 85 °F (29.4 °C) wet
bulb relative to days between 50 °F (10
°C) and 60 °F (15.6 °C) wet bulb. Hanna
(2004) conducted an experiment in an
environmental test chamber with
journeymen electricians installing
duplex receptacles on work panels.
While their laboratory setting did not
allow effects of real-world workplace
factors that affect labor productivity, the
controlled environment tracked heat
exposure in detail by ambient
temperature and humidity level. The
study found that maximum labor
productivity (number of receptables
installed per hour) was achieved at
ambient temperature between 40 °F (4.4
°C) and 70 °F (21.1 °C) with relative
humidity below 80%. At 70% relative
humidity, labor productivity decreased
by 10% when ambient temperature
increased from 70 °F (21.1 °C) to 90 °F
(32.2 °C) (and by 23% when ambient
temperature increased to 100 °F (37.8
°C)). They also found that higher
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
relative humidity reduced labor
productivity further at elevated ambient
temperatures.
II. Proxies for Labor Productivity
This section summarizes findings of
studies that report ‘‘alternative’’
measures of labor productivity, such as
physical work capacity, physical
activity, and self-perceived labor
productivity.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. Physical Work Capacity, ExposureResponse Functions
Work capacity or physical work
capacity is the potential to perform
work under specified set of
environmental conditions (e.g., WBGT)
and physical condition of the worker
(e.g., core body temperature, heart rate)
(Ioannou et al., 2022, p. 75; Bröde et al.,
2018, p. 332). Loss of work capacity
occurs as a physiological response to
heat exposure where the worker reduces
physical activity to avoid negative
health effects (e.g., increases in core
body temperature or heart rate beyond
the safe limit) (Kjellstrom et al., 2014).
Several studies have derived
exposure-response functions that
represent the relationship between heat
exposure and work capacity. Exposureresponse functions in the occupational
health literature fall into two groups
(Borg et al., 2021). The first group of
exposure-response functions are based
on empirical data (e.g., Kjellstrom et al.,
2014; Foster et al., 2021). The second
group are based on recommended workrest ratios in existing work-rest
guidelines by NIOSH, ACGIH, and ISO
(e.g., Kjellstrom et al., 2009b; Dunne et
al., 2013).
b. Empirically-Derived ExposureResponse Functions
As part of the High Occupational
Temperature Health and Productivity
Suppression (Hothaps) Programme,
Kjellstrom et al. (2014) derived an
exposure-response function (henceforth
‘‘Hothaps function’’) linking WBGT to
work capacity for three levels of work
intensity (200 W, 300 W, 400 W) based
on the empirical data involving
acclimatized male workers in Wyndham
(1969) (miners in South Africa) and
Sahu et al. (2013) (rice harvesters in
India).
Foster et al. (2021) derived an
exposure-response function (henceforth
‘‘PWC function’’) linking varying
environmental conditions to work
capacity based on empirical data
collected from one-hour trials involving
young, unacclimatized males
performing physical work in climatic
chambers. In this study, work capacity
is defined as the ‘‘maximum physical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
work output that can be reasonably
expected from an individual performing
moderate to heavy work over an entire
shift.’’ More specifically, Foster et al.
(2021) aimed to measure the amount of
work that can be performed across
varying environmental conditions (e.g.,
combinations of air temperature and
relative humidity) while maintaining a
fixed heart rate at a maximally
acceptable level (e.g., 130 beats per
minute) as a ‘‘surrogate for self-paced
physical workloads.’’ Smallcombe et al.
(2022) replicated the environmental
conditions of Foster et al. (2021) and
computed work capacity during 6 workrest cycles of 50-minute work/10-minute
rest, with a 1-hour break after the first
3 cycles.
There are some benefits of evaluating
the work capacity effects of heat
exposure. Heat exposure-work capacity
response functions (exposure-response)
could be applied to macroeconomic data
and models to estimate the economic
impact of heat exposure (more examples
of studies that borrow these exposureresponse functions are discussed more
detail below in section VIII.I.II.D.II.).
Like Foster et al. (2021) and
Smallcombe et al. (2022), work capacity
could also be measured through
laboratory experiments in controlled
environments, reducing the influence of
confounders and making their results
generalizable across various
environmental conditions.
However, there are caveats with
interpreting the effects of heat exposure
on work capacity reported in the studies
above.
First, they may underestimate the
labor productivity effects observed in
actual work settings for several reasons
(Ioannou et al., 2022). Heat exposure
could reduce labor productivity not
only through reduced work capacity but
also other factors such as increased
central fatigue and reduced cognitive
performance. Also, as discussed more
below in section VIII.I.III.B., workplace
factors such as wage structure may not
always incentivize workers to sustain
high levels of effort at the maximum
capacity every day throughout the entire
shift.
Second, these studies may also
overestimate the labor productivity
effects observed in actual work settings
where self-pacing is more limited.
Although self-pacing is observed in
most workplaces, there are some
workplaces where ability to self-pace is
limited, such as emergency response
activities or work performed on
commission (Ioannou et al., 2022).
Third, some studies assume what is
the physically maximally acceptable
level (e.g., 130 beats per minute) which
PO 00000
Frm 00323
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71019
may not be appropriate for every
worker. From the perspective of
applying their findings to actual work
settings, ‘‘it is not clear how various
physiological (dehydration, cardiac
fatigue, poor sleep quantity/quality) and
psychological (motivation, anxiety)
states impact upon what a worker
deems as an acceptable working heart
rate’’ (Ioannou et al., 2022).
c. Guideline-Based Exposure-Response
Functions
The second group of exposureresponse functions are based on
recommended work-rest ratios in
existing work-rest guidelines set by
NIOSH, ACGIH, and ISO (e.g.,
Kjellstrom et al., 2009b; Dunne et al.,
2013).
There are several reasons for the need
for caution when interpreting the
guideline-based exposure-response
functions.
First, work-rest guidelines represent
the ‘‘the proportions of work hours
during which workers need to take rest
periods, depending on work intensity
and WBGT, in order to avoid the core
body temperature exceeding 38 °C for an
average worker’’ (Kjellstrom et al.,
2009a). Exposure-response functions
based on work-rest guidelines are
‘‘highly conservative because their
objective is to minimize the risk of core
body temperature of the average worker
exceeding 38 °C’’ (Foster et al., 2021).
Guideline-based exposure-response
functions therefore show greater
declines in work capacity in higher
temperatures than the empiricallyderived functions (Kjellstrom et al.,
2014, p. 17; Morrissey et al., 2021a,
Figure 3).
Second, work-rest guidelines
prescribe how much a worker should
reduce their work capacity at different
levels of heat exposure. They do not
represent the causal effect of heat
exposure on work capacity (Foster et al.,
2021, p. 1216).
d. Physical Activity
Some studies tracked the participants’
level of physical activity, based on
methods such as direct observation of
work activities (that are then categorized
into direct work, indirect work, and idle
time), time-motion analysis (video
recording movements that are then
paired with metabolic equivalents) and
accelerometers tracking data (step
counts per minute which are also paired
with metabolic equivalents). Although
these methods do not directly track any
effects on output, they measure changes
in levels of labor input. A major
advantage of these methods is that study
participants are monitored in their
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71020
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
actual working conditions, reflecting
behavioral thermo-regulation (e.g., selfpacing and varying clothing insulation)
and endogenous changes in effort in
response to workplace incentives like
piece-rate pay (Ioannou et al., 2022).
Li et al. (2016) and Yi and Chan
(2017) directly observed rebar
construction workers whose activities
are categorized into direct work
(activities that directly and productively
contribute to task completion, i.e., steel
bar reinforcement), indirect work
(support activities that do not directly or
productively contribute to task
completion, such as walking with tools/
materials or empty-handed, waiting for
materials to be lifted, discussing tasks
with foreman/coworkers), or idle time
(personal time and non-utilization time
due to work stoppage from any cause).
Observing the activities of rebar
construction workers in Hong Kong, Yi
and Chan (2017) found that a 1.8 °F (1
°C) increase in hourly average WBGT
was associated with an approximately
2.8 percentage-point (%p) decrease in
the share of direct work time
(corresponding to 2.8/64 = 4.38% of the
average share of direct work time; 124
effects on the rest of the categories were
not reported). Observing the activities of
rebar construction workers in China, Li
et al. (2016) reported that a 1.8 °F (1 °C)
increase in hourly average WBGT was
associated with a 0.57 %p decrease in
the share of direct work time
(corresponding to 0.57/74 = 0.77% of
the average share of direct work time)
and a 0.74 %p increase in the share of
idle time (corresponding to 0.74/11 =
6.72% of the average share of idle time)
(0.18 %p decrease was also observed in
the share of indirect work time, but the
effects were not significant). Unlike Yi
and Chan (2017) that controlled for
when the temperature was measured
during the workday, a caveat with Li et
al. (2016) is that their reported effects of
higher temperatures could be
confounded by effects of fatigue over the
workday.
Using time-motion analysis on a
sample of construction workers in Spain
over two days, Flouris et al. (2020)
found that the workers take longer
irregular breaks during the hotter day,
Day 1 with a WBGT range 71.2 °F–99.1
°F (21.8 °C–37.3 °C). They found a 4.7fold difference between the time lost
124 The study’s abstract reported the share of
direct work time ‘‘decreasing by 0.33%’’ per 1.8 °F
(1 °C) WBGT increase—OSHA conjectures that this
statement meant that the estimated 2.8 %p decrease
is 3.3% of the predicted average share of direct
work time at 22.28 °C WBGT (lowest observed
WBGT in their data) according to their regression
model where the covariates are held at their sample
average values (some of which are not reported in
the study).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
due to irregular work breaks on a hot
day (Day 1) compared to a cool day (Day
2), with a WBGT range 71.4 °F–88.9 °F
(21.9 °C–31.6 °C). Moreover, they also
found that a planned break intervention
providing hydration to workers could
partially offset these irregular breaks.
Mitchell et al. (2018) used
accelerometer data to track the physical
activity of Californian farmworkers for
one work shift each in the summers of
2014 and 2015. They found that an 18
°F (10 °C) increase in median WBGT
reduced physical activity by 135 counts
per minute compared to an average of
347 counts per minute across all
participants (equivalent to a 3.9%
decrease per 1.8 °F (1 °C) WBGT).
There are some caveats with using
physical activity as a measure of labor
productivity.
First, physical activity measures the
amount of labor inputs instead of actual
output. Some studies such as Ioannou et
al. (2022) considered the focus on labor
inputs rather than production output as
an advantage; for instance, expressing
labor productivity as the amount of crop
produced implies constant availability
and equal distribution of crops across
the tested piece of land. However,
changes such as unequal crop
availability are not problematic unless
they are systematically correlated with
changes in heat exposure.
Second, for studies based on
accelerometer data, without information
if other production inputs exist and how
they affect output (e.g., capital), the
relationship between physical activity
(counts per minute) and labor
productivity is uncertain. For example,
suppose there are two workplaces
exposed to the same temperature and
workers display the same level of
physical activity but one workplace has
machines that assist the workers. Given
the same level of temperature and
physical activity, the workplace that has
machines available could achieve higher
labor productivity.
e. Self-Perceived Labor Productivity
Based on worker surveys, some
studies document effects of heat on selfperceived labor productivity, partly due
to the comparative ease of obtaining
such measurements. Compared to actual
production data, the self-perceived
measures are a less accurate measure of
output and can be affected by other
factors that impact an individual’s selfperceived labor productivity, such as
individual’s level of awareness of heat
stress.
Krishnamurthy et al. (2017)
administered a standardized high
occupational temperature health and
productivity suppression questionnaire
PO 00000
Frm 00324
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
to 84 steel factory workers in India.
Overall, 1% reported taking sick leave
due to heat, 10.6% reported being less
productive due to heat, and 27%
reported that it took longer to complete
the same tasks during summer
compared to cooler seasons. Of the 27%
who reported labor productivity losses,
91% were exposed to direct radiational
heat during steel melting. This
reduction in labor productivity occurred
due to high heat and heavy workload
despite taking rest breaks allowed by the
management after the hot job was
performed (work-rest regimen: 75%
work, 25% rest, each hour). Workers
reported drinking high quantities of
water and rested in shade, but these
actions did not abate the effects of heat
due to the high ambient humidity which
limits sweat evaporation and
evaporative cooling. This study did not
have a direct control group to compare
the actual efficacy of these cooling
mechanisms.
Zander et al. (2015) conducted an
online survey of 1,726 Australian
workers and found that 70% of all
surveyed workers reported productivity
losses due to heat, corresponding to the
majority (93%) of those that reported
being stressed by heat at work. In
comparison, 7% of respondents
reported being absent from work at least
one day in the previous 12 months due
to heat, being absent for 4.4 days on
average. Also focusing on understanding
the impact of heat on Australian
workers, Singh et al. (2015) interviewed
key stakeholders (representatives for
occupational safety and health, unions,
industry, and government organizations)
that reported labor productivity loss due
to heat exposure, but the results were
mostly qualitative and based on a small
sample of 20 stakeholders.
Pogačar et al. (2019) surveyed 70
workers in Greece and 216 workers in
Slovenia and found that most workers
in both Greece (69%) and Slovenia
(71%) reported that they felt heat stress
during heat waves had a ‘‘significant
impact’’ on their productivity.
Additionally, 60% of workers in Greece
and 74% in Slovenia reported that heat
stress significantly impacts their ‘‘wellbeing.’’ 125 These two studies did not
directly track the actual temperature
exposure of these workers and instead
relied on the workers’ own recollection
of the workplace temperatures (e.g.,
‘‘warm,’’ ‘‘hot,’’ ‘‘very hot’’).
Langkulsen et al. (2010) analyzed a
total of 21 Thai workers from four
industrial sites and one agricultural site.
Onsite measurements found that the
125 Authors are not specific what ‘‘well-being’’
means.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
workers were exposed to WBGT ranging
from 78.8 °F to 94.3 °F (25.6 °C to 34.6
°C). For 4 of the 5 sites, the study
assessed the workers’ self-perceived
labor productivity, which revealed large
differences between sectors. While
workers in 2 of the 4 sites that assessed
self-perceived labor productivity
reported losses of self-perceived labor
productivity ranging from 10% to 60%,
workers in the other two sites reported
no losses when exposed to similar heat
(e.g., agriculture). In general, the largest
losses in self-perceived labor
productivity were from sites that had
access to shade and indoors, even sites
with air-conditioning in some cases.
The small sample size across diverse
sites may limit the ability to generalize
these results.
Surveying farmers in Nepal,
Budhathoki and Zander (2019) reported
that perceived labor productivity loss
was strongly associated with the
perceived levels of heat stress.
Moreover, respondents with ‘‘access to
actual weather information’’ 126 were
more likely to perceive labor
productivity losses from heat than those
without this information, indicating that
level of individuals’ awareness
potentially affects their self-reported
assessments of labor productivity.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Occupational Versus Laboratory
Settings
Studies discussed above in sections
VIII.I.II.B.I. and VIII.I.II.B.II. were
conducted either in occupational
settings or laboratory settings. Both
settings have advantages and
disadvantages.
Laboratory settings grant a high
degree of internal validity because the
experiments are more easily
reproducible and represent a direct
causal effect of heat that removes the
influence of confounders (Ioannou et al.,
2022). While laboratory-based studies
provide a relevant benchmark for the
effects of heat on productivity observed
in actual work settings, they are limited
in the generalizability of their findings
to different settings (Somanathan et al.,
2021). In occupational settings, labor
productivity effects of heat would
depend on the physical and behavioral
aspects of employment, such as the
wage contract, particularities of
production processes, management
techniques, and mechanization, which
are not accounted for by laboratory
studies (Somanathan et al., 2021).
126 Authors are not specific what ‘‘access to actual
weather information’’ means.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
C. Mental Performance (Cognitive
Function, Decision-Making).
The literature has documented the
effect of heat exposure on mental
performance in academic, athletic, and
work settings.127 These studies often use
the term ‘‘performance’’ with the intent
to ‘‘include a broader range of effects
[such as test scores] than would be
indicated by [labor] productivity’’ (Heal
and Park, 2013, p. 10).
In a meta-analysis of 22 studies
categorized into reaction time,
attention/perceptual tasks,
mathematical processing, or ’’reasoning,
learning, memory,’’ Pilcher et al. (2002)
reported that a WBGT of 90 °F (32.2 °C)
or greater was associated with a 14.9%
decrease in performance compared to
‘‘neutral temperature conditions’’
defined as WBGT from 60 °F to 69 °F
(15.6 °C to 20.6 °C). Moreover, they also
report that these estimates are also
affected by the duration of exposure to
the heat conditions, the duration of
exposure prior to the task onset, the
type of task, and the task duration,
which can explain the variability of
results in the literature discussed below
(test scores, athletic performance,
workplace performance).
I. Test Scores
Several studies found negative effects
of heat exposure on cognitive test
performance.128 Using student-exam
level panel data of high school exit
exam scores from New York City high
schools (Regents Exams) from 1998 to
2011, Park (2022) found that a 1°F (0.56
°C) higher average exam-time ambient
temperature reduces performance by
0.9% of a standard deviation. Using
panel data of individual-level cognitive
test scores administered at respondents’
homes for children as part of the
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
(NLSY79), Graff Zivin et al. (2018)
found that an additional 1.8°F (1 °C) of
average daily ambient temperature
127 Reduced mental performance due to heat
exposure (e.g., mistakes, inattention, long reaction
time) is also linked to increased heat-related
injuries—for a detailed discussion, see Section
IV.P., Heat-Related Injuries.
128 Literature has also found evidence of heat
exposure on longer-term outcomes such as student
learning and adult earnings. Cho (2017) reported
effects of summertime heat exposure on national
college entrance exam scores in South Korea
(administered nationwide in November). Park et al.
(2020) reported effects of cumulative heat exposure
from hotter days during the prior school year on
PSAT exam scores of U.S. high school students.
Garg et al. (2020b) reported effects of hotter days
during the prior school year on academic
achievement for Indian children in primary and
secondary school. Isen et al. (2017) reported effects
of heat exposure in utero on adult earnings in U.S.
employer-employee matched longitudinal data from
the Census Bureau’s Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics (LEHD) program.
PO 00000
Frm 00325
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71021
above 69.8 °F (21 °C) reduced math
performance by 0.219 percentile point
(no significant effects found for
reading). Using student-exam level
panel data of national college entrance
exam scores in China, Graff Zivin et al.
(2020) found that a 1.8 °F (1 °C) higher
average exam-period (2 days) ambient
temperature reduced performance by
0.34%. Using panel data of individuallevel cognitive test scores administered
at respondents’ homes for adults as well
as children as part of a nationally
representative biennial longitudinal
survey in China, Zhang et al. (2024)
found that a test day with an average
ambient temperature above 89.6 °F (32
°C), relative to a day in the 71.6 °F–75.2
°F (22 °C–24 °C) range, leads to a
reduction in math performance by 6.6%
of a standard deviation (no significant
effects found for reading).
II. Athletic Performance
Several studies found negative effects
of heat exposure on athletic
performance, despite this discussion
being grouped with studies on mental
performance, athletic performance is
likely related to both mental and
physical performance (Burke et al.,
2023, p. 11).
Using athlete-contest level panel data
of 3,196 professional archers in China
from 2010 to 2016, Qiu and Zhao (2022)
found a negative effect of higher daily
heat index on performance. Relative to
the baseline heat index range of 64.4 °F–
71.6 °F (18 °C–22 °C),129 the study
found that at sample average wind
speed of 2.35 meters per second, average
score decreased by approximately 3%
when the heat index was 78.8 °F–93.2
°F (26 °C–34 °C) and by 10.4% when the
heat index exceeded 93.2 °F (34 °C).
They also found that the effect of higher
heat index on performance was less
negative for top performers (defined as
athletes whose performance index,
defined as their average scores in all
contests in previous competitions,
exceeds the 90th percentile).
Using athlete-competition level panel
data on 3.5 million collegiate track and
field performances from 2005 to 2019,
Sexton et al. (2022) found a nonlinear
relationship between daily average
ambient temperature and performance.
Performance of sprint and strength
events improved with increasing
temperatures up to 75 °F (23.9 °C), after
which decline in performance was
129 To compute heat indices below 80 °F (26.7
°C), Qiu and Zhao (2022) used the following
formula: HI = 0.5*(T+61.0+[(T–
68.0)*1.2]+RH*0.094), where HI is heat index in
Fahrenheit, T is ambient temperature in Fahrenheit,
and RH is relative humidity in percentage (p. 1159,
footnote 18).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71022
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
insignificant; on the other hand,
performances in endurance events
declined significantly when
temperatures were above 60 °F (15.6 °C),
by 5 percentage points for each 5 °F
(2.78 °C) increase in daily average
ambient temperature relative to the
baseline temperature range of 55 °F–60
°F (12.8 °C–15.6 °C).
Using player-match level panel data
on 177,000 tennis matches from 2002 to
2017, Burke et al. (2023) found negative
effects of heat exposure on the
performance of professional tennis
players (e.g., more double faults, more
match retirement, shorter rallies, less
total distance run). They reported a
‘‘roughly 0.5% decline’’ in player
performance per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase
in average ambient temperature of the
day of the match. They also found that
the effects of heat exposure on
performance were less negative for
players ranked in the top 10. They also
noted that their estimated effect of heat
exposure on professional tennis players,
which the authors considered as ‘‘highwage settings,’’ is about ‘‘half of the
roughly 1.0%’’ decline in labor
productivity per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in
ambient temperature that they estimated
from their meta-analysis of 22 studies.
The authors conducted the metaanalysis as part of their literature review
of existing evidence of labor
productivity effects of heat exposure,
which focused on ‘‘lower-wage
settings.’’
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Workplace Performance
Focusing on studies based on actual
office work or laboratory experiments
that resemble office work, Seppänen et
al. (2006) conducted a meta-analysis of
24 published studies, concluding that
performance decreased with a
temperature above 73.4 °F to 75.2 °F (23
°C to 24 °C). The tasks analyzed include
text processing, simple calculations
(addition, multiplication), length of
telephone customer service time, and
total handling time per customer for call
center workers, making them
comparable to cognitive tasks conducted
in other studies. They estimated a nonlinear relationship between performance
and heat: performance decreased by 9%
at 86 °F (30 °C) compared to an optimal
level of 69.8 °F to 71.6 °F (21 °C to 22
°C).
Some studies found evidence that
heat exposure affects the mental
performance of outdoor workers.
Bendak et al. (2022) conducted a
longitudinal empirical study to assess
how high ambient temperatures affect
construction workers’ performance on a
variety of tasks measuring reaction time,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
finding that task performance was lower
in high ambient temperatures.
However, their analysis compared
summer and winter months; therefore,
the results are possibly confounded by
seasonality effects. Similarly, Mazlomi
et al. (2017) reported that workplace
heat conditions measured by WBGT
were negatively correlated with foundry
plant workers’ performance in cognitive
tests. In contrast, Spector et al. (2018)
found no association between maximum
work-shift WBGT and post-shift reaction
time or postural sway for 46 tree fruit
harvesters in Washington State.
D. Economic Output
Studies that documented the
economic output effects of heat
exposure fall into two groups. The first
group of studies directly estimated the
effect on heat exposure using plant/
firm-level and region-level output data.
The second group of studies borrowed
heat exposure-work capacity response
functions from the occupational health
literature (which are derived from
empirical data or existing ACGIH/
NIOSH/ISO work-rest guidelines) and
assumed workers are behaving
according to these exposure-response
functions.
I. Studies Directly Estimating the Effect
on Heat Exposure Using Economic
Output Data
Numerous studies in the economics
literature found evidence of negative
output effects of heat exposure at the
plant/firm-level and region-level.
This section does not focus on studies
about the effects of higher temperatures
on economic output through other
channels such as agricultural yield,
productivity of capital (e.g., faster
depreciation of infrastructure), labor
reallocation, energy demand, and
international trade.
This section focuses on studies that
used panel data to analyze changes (e.g.,
daily, weekly, quarterly, yearly) in
temperature and outcomes of interest
across space (e.g., plant/firm, region)
and time. By controlling for timeinvariant differences across space that
may be confounded with temperature,
the panel data approach helps to
address some concerns over omitted
variable bias associated with crosssectional studies (Auffhammer, 2018, p.
43; Massetti and Mendelsohn, 2018, p.
327).
a. Plant/Firm-Level Output Effects
Several studies found economic
output effects of heat exposure using
plant/firm-level panel data. Cachon et
al. (2012) followed 64 automobile
manufacturing plants in the U.S. from
PO 00000
Frm 00326
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1994 to 2005 and found that a week
with six or more days with a daily
maximum ambient temperature
exceeding 90 °F (32.2 °C) reduced
weekly production by 8%. The findings
control for potential confounders such
as changes in national demand and
seasonality in demand for specific types
of automobiles. However, the data did
not allow the study to distinguish the
contribution of labor productivity and
labor supply. Information on the extent
of indoor climate controls in these
manufacturing plants was also not
available.
Somanathan et al. (2021) estimated
the output effects of heat exposure at
different levels of aggregation (worker,
plant, district) and found that their
estimated effects are all of similar
magnitude. Using daily worker-level
production data from selected
manufacturing firms in India, they
found that daily output per worker
declined in higher outdoor
temperatures, falling 2.7% per 1.8 °F (1
°C) increase in daily maximum ambient
temperature above 77 °F (25 °C) (this
study was also mentioned above in
section VIII.I.II.B.I.). Using annual plantlevel output data from a nationally
representative panel of manufacturing
plants in India, they found that annual
plant-level output (measured by value
added, defined as the difference
between total output and the value of
intermediate inputs) decreased by 2.1%
per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in the annual
average of the daily maximum ambient
temperature. Under the specification of
the Cobb-Douglas function, they
reported that changes in labor input as
opposed to capital input explains these
declines in plant-level output.130 Using
annual district-level manufacturing
sector GDP data from a sample of 438
districts in India, they found that annual
district-level manufacturing output
decreased by 3.5% per 1.8 °F (1°C)
increase in the annual average of the
daily maximum ambient temperature.
The authors further noted that the
magnitude of their estimated effects
mirrored the country-level estimates of
output effects in the literature (countrylevel studies are described in more
detail in section VIII.I.II.D.I.b., below),
which they interpreted as evidence heat
exposure affects output through labor
productivity.
130 Assuming the specification of the CobbDouglas production function, Somanathan et al.
(2021) also found that changes in labor input
(measured by number of full-time workers) as
opposed to capital input (measured by net value of
equipment of machinery at the start of each year)
explained the negative effect of higher temperature
on plant-level output.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Using daily production line-level data
from garment factories around
Bangalore, India, Adhvaryu et al. (2020)
found that production line efficiency
(measured as ratio of realized output to
target output) decreased in higher
outdoor temperatures, by 2.1% for per
1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in daily average
WBGT above 66.2 °F (19 °C). They did
not find significant effects of higher
temperatures on worker attendance,
providing further support that labor
productivity effects were likely the
reason behind the observed
relationship. Using annual firm-level
data from the annual survey of
industrial firms that are ‘‘above-scale’’
(with sales over a certain threshold) in
China from 1998 to 2007 and assuming
the specification of the Cobb-Douglas
function, Zhang et al. (2018) found an
inverted U-shaped relationship between
temperature and total factor
productivity (TFP) and output in the
Chinese manufacturing sector. They
found that, relative to a year with an
extra day of average ambient
temperature of 50 °F–60 °F (10 °C–15.6
°C), a year with an extra day over 90 °F
(32.2 °C) had lower annual firm-level
TFP by 0.56% and lower firm-level
output (measured by value added,
defined as the difference between total
output and the value of intermediate
inputs) by 0.45%. They also found that
the TFP effects and output effects of
temperature are of similar magnitude for
both labor-intensive and capitalintensive firms, suggesting that both
labor productivity and capital
productivity were affected by heat
exposure.
Using the same dataset as Zhang et al.
(2018), Chen and Yang (2019) found that
a 1.8°F (1°C) increase in the average
summer temperature (3-month average
of daily average ambient temperatures
for months June through August)
decreased value added per worker by
3.4% to 4.5%. They also found two
potential channels through which
higher temperatures reduce output:
decrease in firm investment and
increase in inventory levels.
Using annual firm-level data on
revenue per worker in the
manufacturing and services sectors from
15 developed and developing countries,
Nath (2020) found a stronger negative
effect of an extra hot day (a day with
maximum ambient temperature of 104
°F (40 °C) relative to a day of 86 °F (30
°C)) on annual revenue per worker for
poorer countries (i.e., lower purchasing
power parity (PPP)-adjusted GDP per
capita). They also found that the decline
in revenue per worker was driven by
changes in both the numerator (annual
revenue) and denominator (annual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
employment), where the change in the
numerator was greater than that of the
denominator.
There are several caveats with studies
reporting plant/firm-level output effects
of heat exposure. First, although some
studies identified labor productivity as
the main mechanism for their findings
(Somanathan et al., 2021; Adhvaryu et
al., 2020; Nath, 2020), the literature
overall is inconclusive regarding the
extent to which the effects are driven by
labor productivity (versus other
channels such as labor supply and
capital).
Second, some studies used outdoor
heat conditions as a proxy for indoor
heat conditions to estimate the labor
productivity effects of heat exposure in
indoor work settings. However, indoor
heat conditions may not be perfectly
correlated with outdoor heat conditions,
especially with the presence of heatgenerating lighting and machines and
the unknown extent of indoor climate
controls (Cachon et al., 2012; Adhvaryu
et al.,2020).131
b. Region-Level Output Effects
Several studies found economic
output effects of heat exposure using
region-level panel data. Some studies
used county-level or State-level panel
data to estimate the effects of heat on
economic output. Deryugina and Hsiang
(2014) used U.S. county-level panel data
of annual total personal income per
capita and daily weather from 1969 to
2011 to find that average per-day
personal income per capita declines
1.68% per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in daily
average ambient temperature above 59
°F (15 °C). Behrer and Park (2017) used
U.S. county-level panel data of annual
non-agricultural payroll per capita and
daily weather from 1986 to 2011 to find
that an additional hot day (a day of
daily maximum ambient temperature
above 95 °F (35 °C) relative to a day of
70 °F–79 °F (21.1 °C–26.1 °C)) reduced
annual payroll per capita by 0.04%.
Colacito et al. (2019) used U.S. Statelevel panel data of State GDP (i.e., gross
State product) and daily weather to find
that annual growth rate of a State’s
output declined by 0.15–0.25 percentage
point per 1 °F (0.56 °C) increase in the
average summer ambient temperature
(three-month average of daily average
ambient temperatures for months July
through September).
131 Using indoor temperature data that was not
available during the period when labor productivity
effects were analyzed and was available only
afterwards, Adhvaryu et al. (2020) reported a high
but imperfect pass-through of 79% of outdoor
ambient temperature to indoor ambient
temperature.
PO 00000
Frm 00327
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71023
Some studies used country-level
panel data to estimate the effects of heat
on economic output. Hsiang (2010)
found for a panel of 28 Caribbean-Basin
countries from 1970 to 2006 that annual
output decreased by 2.4% per 1.8 °F (1
°C) increase in the average annual
ambient temperature and the effects
were driven by temperature changes
during the hottest season (September
through November). Furthermore, the
study highlighted the similarity between
their estimated output effects of
temperature and the worker
productivity effects of temperature
reported in the ‘‘ergonomics and
physiology’’ literature as evidence for
labor productivity being an important
channel underlying the economic effects
of heat exposure. Dell et al. (2012) found
for a panel of 124 countries from 1950
to 2003 that higher temperatures
affected growth rates as well as level of
output, but only in poor countries,
defined as ‘‘having below-median PPPadjusted per capita GDP in the first year
the country enters the dataset.’’ They
found that 1.8 °F (1 °C) higher annual
average ambient temperature in poor
countries was associated with 2.04%p
lower annual average growth in
industrial output (growth in value
added in mining, manufacturing,
construction, electricity, water, and gas
sectors). Some studies also found a
nonlinear effect of temperature on
economic output, implying that higher
temperature negatively affects poor
countries that tend to be hot and
positively affects rich countries that
tend to be cold (Heal and Park, 2016, p.
356). Heal and Park (2013) found for a
panel of 134 countries from 1950 to
2006 that the response of annual real
GDP per capita to annual average
ambient temperature is nonlinear, that
is, an inverted U-shaped response
peaking at around 59 °F–68 °F (15 °C–
20 °C). Burke et al. (2015) found for a
panel of 166 countries from 1960 to
2010 an inverted U-shaped response of
annual average GDP per capita to annual
average temperate peaking at 55.4 °F (13
°C).
There are several caveats with studies
reporting region-level output effects of
heat exposure.
First, there is uncertainty regarding
the extent to which labor productivity
alone can explain the decline in output
due to heat exposure (Lai et al., 2023).
On the one hand, several studies
highlighted labor productivity as an
important if not the main channel
through which heat exposure negatively
affects output (e.g., Hsiang, 2010;
Somanathan et al., 2021; Dell et al.,
2014). On the other hand, due to the less
frequent measurements of output (e.g.,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71024
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
weekly, monthly, yearly), it is unclear if
the results were driven by reductions in
labor supply, labor productivity, labor
demand, capital productivity, firm
investment, increase in firm costs, or
‘‘some combination of all of these’’
(Behrer et al., 2021). For example, the
estimated changes in output could be
capturing demand-side factors either
positively or negatively correlated with
temperature (e.g., demand for ice cream
increases with temperature; demand for
outdoor recreation decreases with
temperature) (Behrer and Park, 2017, p.
16). Changes in payroll may also not
necessarily capture only changes in
labor productivity but also capture
changes in labor supply and increased
firm costs (e.g., increased costs due to
higher utilization of air-conditioning
reducing firm profits or net income)
(Behrer and Park, 2017, p. 13).
Second, although some of these
studies found effects of heat-exposure
on nonagricultural output, these
observed associations may be in part
due to the non-agricultural sectors
facing less demand as a spillover effect
of agricultural yield reductions from the
agricultural sector (Dell et al., 2012, p.
85; Heal and Park, 2016, p. 9).
II. Studies Borrowing ExposureResponse Functions From Occupational
Health Literature
Section VIII.I.II.D.II. discussed studies
that directly estimated the relationship
between heat exposure and economic
output and tried to uncover the
underlying the potential mechanisms
such as labor productivity.
This section discusses other studies
that borrowed heat exposure-work
capacity response (exposure-response)
functions that were derived by existing
studies in the occupational health
literature. Applying these functions to
the worker population of interest (e.g.,
outdoor workers nationwide), these
studies derived economy-wide labor
productivity loss and the associated
economic cost in terms of lost wages or
lost output.
As discussed in the section
VIII.I.II.B.I.a., exposure-response
functions in the occupational health
literature fall into two groups. The first
group of exposure-response functions
are based on empirical data (e.g.,
Hothaps function derived in Kjellstrom
et al., 2014; PWC function derived in
Foster et al., 2021). The second group of
exposure-response functions are based
on recommended work-rest ratios in
existing work-rest guidelines by NIOSH,
ACGIH, and ISO (e.g., Kjellstrom et al.,
2009b; Dunne et al., 2013).
These empirically-derived or
guideline-based exposure-response
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
functions from the occupational health
literature were applied by several
studies to macroeconomic data and
models to estimate the economic impact
of heat exposure. These studies fall into
three groups: the first group of studies
(e.g., Orlov et al., 2019; Morabito et al.,
2020, Nelson et al., 2024) borrowed the
empirically-derived functions; the
second group of studies (e.g., DARA,
2012; Vanos et al., 2019; Takakura et al.,
2017; Atlantic Council, 2022; de Lima et
al., 2021) borrowed the guideline-based
functions ; and the third group of
studies (e.g., Kjellstrom et al., 2018; ILO,
2019; Atlantic Council, 2021; Romanello
et al., 2023; Dasgupta et al., 2021)
borrowed and combined empiricallyderived functions with the guidelinebased functions.
There are some caveats with studies
relying on existing exposure-response
functions to estimate the economic
impact of heat exposure. First,
empirically-derived exposure-response
functions are context-specific (e.g., the
Hothaps function is based on data from
acclimatized outdoor workers in hotter
regions; the PWC function is based on
data from unacclimatized young adults
in indoor climatic chambers). Studies
relying on empirically-derived functions
are effectively assuming that the average
worker behaves as predicted by these
context-specific functions.
Second, existing work-rest guidelines
were designed to increase work-rest
ratios to minimize heat-related illnesses
(Borg et al., 2021, p. 12) and were never
intended to estimate the casual effect of
heat exposure on work capacity (Foster
et al., 2021, p. 1216). Studies relying on
guideline-based exposure-response
functions effectively assumed that the
average worker behaves according to the
recommended work-rest ratios.
Therefore, these studies reported larger
economic costs associated with lost
work capacity from heat than what is
reported by empirical studies (Borg et
al., 2021, p. 12).
E. Worker Utility
Higher temperatures not only reduce
labor supply and labor productivity, but
also ‘‘cause discomfort’’ (Graff Zivin and
Neidell, 2014, p. 1) or ‘‘make work more
arduous’’ for those able to work (Rode
et al., 2022, p. 3). Several studies have
indeed found evidence that workers
dislike working in the heat, suggesting
the negative effects of heat exposure on
worker utility.
Some studies found evidence of the
negative effect of heat exposure on
worker utility based on worker surveys.
Krishnamurthy et al. (2017) reported
that about a quarter of surveyed steel
factory workers in India reported social
PO 00000
Frm 00328
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
impacts on their personal lives
attributable to occupational heat stress.
Reported impacts include the time and
resources spent coping with the heat
and the excessive exhaustion impeding
the engagement in family and social
interactions outside work. Such
responses highlight a potential
mechanism through which heat
increases disutility of labor. LoPalo
(2023) also found that in higher
temperatures, household survey
interviewers worked longer hours (by
starting earlier in the day and spending
more time on each interview) to avoid
working during hotter times of the day
and to also meet their daily target
number of completed interviews,
suggesting a loss in the welfare of the
interviewer through a loss of leisure
hours.
Some workers even reported
intentions to change jobs due to heat
exposure, as expressed in an online
survey conducted by Zander et al.
(2015), showing that 27% of the
surveyed Australian workers exposed to
heat said they would eventually change
jobs because of heat at their workplace.
In contrast, only 8% of the surveyed
workers who are sometimes exposed to
heat said they considered this option,
and those rarely exposed only expressed
this 2% of the time. On the other hand,
Kahn (2016) highlighted an example of
market failure where employers having
monopsony power in local labor
markets can still hire workers at low
wages for ‘‘unpleasant’’ jobs exposed to
heat without adequate worker
protection measures in place, such as
large warehouses without airconditioning (p. 171).
Interpreting their empiricallyestimated decline in labor supply in
higher temperatures as workers
choosing to work less in the heat at the
cost of foregoing pay (discussed above
in section VIII.I.II.A.), Rode et al. (2022)
derived the willingness-to-pay to avoid
the increased disutility of working in
higher temperatures (defined as the
increase in the wage rate that is needed
to offset the increased disutility of
labor).
F. Summary of Section VIII.I.II
The literature documents effects of
heat exposure on outcomes with
economic consequences. Effects are
observed in a variety of occupational
settings, suggesting that the effects of
heat exposure are widespread across a
broad range of tasks that rely on
physical or cognitive skills and that heat
exposure affects workers in both indoor
and outdoor settings. In particular, the
literature recognizes labor productivity
as a potential channel through which
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
heat exposure affects economic
outcomes.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Workplace Characteristics and Labor
Productivity Effects of Heat Exposure
The literature’s varying estimates of
the effect of heat exposure on labor
productivity could be attributed to
differences in workplace characteristics,
such as incentive structures and
availability of adaptation measures
(Park et al., 2021, p. 8, footnote 13).
These workplace characteristics should
be considered when interpreting the
variation in estimates of the labor
productivity-related effects of heat
exposure in the literature (Heal and
Park, 2016, p. 350). This section focuses
on studies that reported labor
productivity (discussed in section
VIII.I.II.B., above) but also includes
some studies that are potentially related
to labor productivity, such as studies on
mental performance (discussed in
section VIII.I.II.C., above) or studies on
economic output effects that are
potentially linked to labor productivity
(discussed in section VIII.I.II.D.I.,
above).
A. Incentive Structures
Depending on the physical and
behavioral aspects of the workplace,
workers and management could be
incentivized to change the level of
effort, affecting the estimated labor
productivity effect of heat exposure.
Workplace factors that affect incentives
include wage structure (e.g., piece-rate,
hourly rate, annual salary), management
techniques, mechanization, and other
factors not accounted for by laboratory
studies (Somanathan et al., 2021).
One of the most analyzed workplace
factors in the literature is piece-rate pay.
Quiller et al. (2017) found null effects of
heat on labor productivity (measure by
weight of fruit bins collected per hour)
for a sample of piece-rate paid tree fruit
harvesters in Washington State, after
adjusting for confounders such as price
paid per bin and shift duration. Mitchell
et al. (2018) used accelerometer data
from farm workers in California to find,
even after adjusting for confounders,
negative effects of heat on labor
productivity (measured by physical
activity intensity, i.e., step counts per
minute, converted into metabolic
equivalents) and that the effects were
less negative for male workers paid by
piece-rate. Such small or zero labor
productivity effects could reflect
compensatory effort on part of workers
incentivized to be as productive as
possible, the health and safety
consequences of which should not be
overlooked (Park et al., 2021, p. 8,
footnote 13). Piece-rate workers being
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
incentivized to work fast and take few
rest breaks even under heat exposure
have been evidenced in focus group
discussions with U.S. farmworkers
(Wadsworth et al., 2019; Lam et al.,
2013).
Several studies also found that, due to
physiological constraints, piece-rate
workers cannot increase their effort
infinitely in the heat. Stevens (2017)
found that higher piece-rates induced
increases in labor productivity of
blueberry pickers in California at
ambient temperatures below 60 °F but
not at higher temperatures. Masuda et
al. (2021) also found in a field
experiment in Indonesia that increasing
the piece-rate did not increase effort, as
measured by the proportion of time
spent in moderate and vigorous activity
through an accelerometer. This evidence
is consistent with workers facing
binding physiological constraints that
prevent them from exerting additional
effort in response to higher piece-rates
at high temperatures.
In their findings of the labor
productivity effects of environmental
conditions, some studies also addressed
the possibility that piece-rate workers’
labor productivity could decline further
if they are subject to State minimum
wage laws (e.g., Stevens, 2017 in the
context of heat; Graff Zivin and Neidell,
2012 in the context of ozone pollution).
Hypothetically, compared to when not
guaranteed a minimum wage, higher
temperatures could lead piece-rate
workers to exert less effort and therefore
result in greater decline in labor
productivity.
From data on Demographic and
Health Surveys (DHS) interviewers from
46 developing countries, LoPalo (2023)
found nuanced adjustments in effort by
DHS interviewers. DHS interviewers are
paid a fixed daily wage (i.e., not piecerate) but are still monitored by
supervisors to ensure they meet the
target number of completed interviews.
Under this contractual structure, higher
temperatures result in lower labor
productivity in terms of number of
completed interviews per hour—
interviewers are able to maintain the
same daily number of completed
interviews but at the cost of a longer
shift from trying to avoid working in the
heat (by starting work earlier and
spending more time on each interview).
They also found that data quality
problems (e.g., missing responses)
become more frequent on hotter days,
suggesting that workers shift effort away
from production quality, which is less
noticeable to supervisors, to production
quantity, which is more noticeable.
PO 00000
Frm 00329
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71025
B. Adaptation
Regarding adaptation measures 132
alleviating the negative labor
productivity-related effects of heat
exposure, the most analyzed in the
literature are the adoption of
engineering controls. Using microdata
from selected manufacturing plants in
India, Somanathan et al. (2021) found
that climate controls in the workplace
eliminated declines in labor
productivity due to elevated
temperatures but did not eliminate
declines in labor supply (based on
worker attendance records). The authors
conjectured declines in labor supply
persisted despite climate-controlled
conditions at work because workers
presumably continued to be exposed to
high temperature at home and outside.
Adhvaryu et al. (2020) found in linelevel production data from Indian
garment factories that the introduction
of LED lighting (that replaced compact
fluorescent lighting which generates
more heat) helped to alleviate the
negative effect of high outdoor
temperatures on production line
efficiency. Using panel data of
individual-level cognitive test scores
administered at respondents’ homes for
adults as well as children as part of a
132 Some studies reporting economic output
effects (discussed above in section VIII.I.II.D.I.)
found heterogeneous effects of temperature
depending on regional climate. They found that
hotter regions displayed smaller declines in output
to higher temperatures, suggesting that their
findings could reflect adaptation in these regions.
For example, Chen and Yang (2019) found lower
sensitivity in the response of value added per
worker to higher temperatures among plants
associated with a single firm in warmer locations
in China and raised the possibility of adaptation
measures such as avoiding work during hottest
times of the day playing a role. Zhang et al. (2023)
used Chinese province-level panel data of
construction labor productivity (defined as the ratio
of the total value of output to the number of
laborers in construction enterprises) and quarterly
weather to find an inverted U-shaped relationship
between quarterly construction labor productivity
and quarterly average ambient temperature that
peaked at higher temperatures in hotter regions
(79.25 °F (26.25 °C) in eastern regions versus 68 °F
(20 °C) for central and western regions). They
conjectured that workers in hotter regions are more
adapted to high temperatures so that the peak
temperature after which their labor productivity
started to decline was higher. Behrer and Park
(2017) used U.S. county-level panel data of annual
non-agricultural payroll per capita and daily
weather to find that the negative effect of an
additional hot day on annual payroll per capita was
smaller in hotter counties (in the top quartile of the
U.S. average ambient temperature distribution).
They suggested that such attenuated effects of heat
exposure in hotter regions can be explained by the
larger presence of air-conditioning in these regions,
as evidenced by region-level data on percentage of
households and commercial buildings with airconditioning. Heal and Park (2013) also found in
country-level panel data that annual real GDP per
capita was less negatively affected by heat exposure
in hot countries where air-conditioning was more
prevalent.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71026
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
nationally representative biennial
longitudinal survey in China, Zhang et
al. (2024) found that their estimated
effect of higher temperatures on math
test scores was less negative by 36.6%
for households with air-conditioning.
Some studies that found negative
effects of heat exposure on athletic
performance also evaluated the effects
of acclimatization.133 Using athletecompetition level panel data on
collegiate track and field performances,
Sexton et al. (2022) found that hotter
average ambient temperatures at the
home institution in the week prior to
the competition (‘‘precompetition
temperatures’’) mitigated performance
loss from high competition
temperatures. They reported that for hot
competitions with daily average
ambient temperatures exceeding 70 °F
(21.1 °C), performance loss from high
competition temperature decreases by
1.6%–3.5% per 1.8 °F (1 °C) increase in
temperature difference between the
precompetition and competition
temperatures. On the other hand, using
athlete-contest level panel data of
Chinese professional archers, Qiu and
Zhao (2022) did not find evidence that
heat exposure within several months
prior to a competition improved
competition performance in the heat.
Qiu and Zhao (2022) however found
evidence of benefits of ‘‘longer-term
acclimatization’’; athletes that trained in
the southern provinces of China, where
hot days are more common, were less
affected by heat exposure than those
trained in the northern provinces. From
player-match level panel data of
professional tennis players, Burke et al.
(2023) also did not find evidence of
benefits of acclimatization; players who
played their previous match in higher
temperatures did worse in their current
match. Burke et al. (2023) also did not
find evidence of benefits of ‘‘long-term
exposure to heat’’; players born or
residing in locations of higher
temperatures did not appear to be less
affected by higher temperatures during
the match. Burke et al. (2023)
conjectured that their lack of evidence
of benefits of acclimatization compared
to Sexton et al. (2022) could be because
their proxy of acclimatization captured
players playing an actual match in high
temperatures, while acclimatization
could be ‘‘more effective during
repeated episodes of more restrained
effort, as emphasized in most sports
heat acclimatization protocols (p. 12).’’
133 In the context of labor supply, Graff Zivin and
Neidell (2014) found that their estimated negative
effect of heat exposure on labor supply was smaller
in August compared to June, suggesting that
workers became less sensitive to heat exposure as
higher temperatures became more common. As
another test for effects of acclimatization, they also
found that the negative effect of heat exposure on
labor supply was smaller in ‘‘warm counties’’
compared to ‘‘cool counties’’ (defined as counties
in the highest and lowest third of historical July–
August temperatures, respectively), although the
estimated difference was not statistically
significant.
134 ACS includes 4-digit NAICS codes and
detailed (6-digit) SOC codes for some industries and
occupations. However, given that ACS uses
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
C. Summary of Section VIII.I.III
To summarize, workplace incentives
and availability of adaptation measures
affect the estimated labor productivityrelated effects of heat exposure
documented in the literature.
IV. Conclusion
The available literature on the effects
of heat exposure on non-health
outcomes suggests that heat exposure
can lead to decreased labor productivity
as well as to reduced labor supply,
mental performance, economic output,
and worker utility. It also indicates that
existing workplace characteristics such
as incentive structures and adoption of
adaptation measures should be
considered when evaluating these
negative non-health consequences of
heat exposure.
J. Appendix C. Heat Exposure
Methodology Used in Distributional
Analysis
The following steps were taken to
quantify the fraction of workers
benefiting from the proposed standard
in different demographic and economic
categories.
I. ACS Data Processing
The analysis uses data from the
Census Bureau’s American Community
Survey (ACS) from 2018 to 2022
(Ruggles et al., 2024). 2022 is the most
recent available year of ACS data. ACS
data provide worker-level information
on demographic and economic
characteristics. The following
demographic and economic
characteristics are recorded in the ACS:
age; race and ethnicity; sex; total family
income; industry; occupation; the
presence of a disability related to
cognition, physical activity, mobility,
self-care, vision, or hearing; and U.S.
citizenship. In addition, LGBTQ+ status
was inferred from cases where an
individual was living (married or
unmarried) with a same-sex partner.
Only data for employed workers 16
years or older was used. The ACS
variables were processed as follows. Age
was grouped into 10-year bins (with age
65+ as the top bin). Race and ethnicity
variables were coded into the groups
PO 00000
Frm 00330
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Hispanic, Black, Asian (including
Pacific Islander), White (non-Hispanic),
and other groups. Total family income
was converted into deciles. Presence of
a disability was coded into a single
indicator variable for the presence of
any disability. Sex and the presence of
a same-sex partner required no further
processing.
II. Merging ACS Data With Heat
Exposure Measures
Calculations of workers likely to be
affected by the proposed standard from
Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected
Industries were next merged with the
ACS data. Fractions of workers exposed
to heat by industry and occupation was
used. In Section VIII.B., Profile of
Affected Industries, exposure was
calculated at the 4-digit NAICS level
and with detailed (6-digit) SOC codes.
To consistently merge with the ACS,
these affected workers were aggregated
to the 2-digit NAICS code by 4-digit
SOC code level.134 The aggregation was
done by calculating weighted average
fraction of workers exposed to heat in
outdoor settings and indoor settings
(separately due to process heat or
inadequate climate control) in each
industry-occupation pair. The weights
were number of workers in each 4-digit
by 6-digit category, as calculated in
Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected
Industries. The worker-level ACS data
were then merged with the industry-byoccupation exposure fractions.
III. Calculate Exposure by Demographic
and Economic Group
For each dimension of heterogeneity
described above, the average share of
exposed workers was calculated. The
average exposure was weighted by the
person-weights in the ACS to generate
representative values for the U.S.
The result is a figure like figure
VIII.J.1. shown below. The figure shows
the percent of workers exposed to
outdoor heat across total family income
deciles. The deciles are given on the xaxis along with the range of income they
represent, and the y-axis is the
percentage of workers. The figure
VIII.J.1. shows that about 13 percent of
workers in low-income deciles are
exposed to outdoor heat on the job
while about 7 percent of workers in the
highest income decile are exposed.
different industry and occupation definitions than
NAICS and SOC, many industries and occupations
are only consistently coded at the 2- or 4-digit level
respectively. For example, in the ACS, all
construction workers are only classified at the 2digit NAICS level (NAICS 23). Aggregation to the
2-digit NAICS code and 4-digit SOC code level
ensures consistency across workers.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
71027
Figure VTII.J. l. Example of Workers with Heat Exposure in Outdoor Work Settings by Total
Family Income Decile
Income decile
K. Appendix D. Definitions of Core
Industry Categories Used in Cost
Analysis
TABLE VIII.K.1—IN-SCOPE CORE INDUSTRIES BY CORE INDUSTRY CATEGORIES
4-Digit
NAICS
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Building Materials and Equipment
Building Materials and Equipment
NAICS title
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
Suppliers .........
Suppliers .........
111100
111200
111300
111400
111900
112100
112200
112300
112400
112500
112900
113100
113200
113300
114100
114200
115100
115200
115300
423300
423700
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers .........
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers .........
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers .........
Commercial Kitchens .............................................
Commercial Kitchens .............................................
Commercial Kitchens .............................................
Commercial Kitchens .............................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
423900
444100
532400
311800
722300
722400
722500
236100
236200
237100
237200
237300
237900
238100
238200
238300
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00331
Oilseed and Grain Farming.
Vegetable and Melon Farming.
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming.
Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production.
Other Crop Farming.
Cattle Ranching and Farming.
Hog and Pig Farming.
Poultry and Egg Production.
Sheep and Goat Farming.
Aquaculture.
Other Animal Production.
Timber Tract Operations.
Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products.
Logging.
Fishing.
Hunting and Trapping.
Support Activities for Crop Production.
Support Activities for Animal Production.
Support Activities for Forestry.
Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant Wholesalers.
Hardware, and Plumbing and Heating Equipment and Supplies Merchant
Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Building Material and Supplies Dealers.
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing.
Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing.
Special Food Services.
Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages).
Restaurants and Other Eating Places.
Residential Building Construction.
Nonresidential Building Construction.
Utility System Construction.
Land Subdivision.
Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction.
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors.
Building Equipment Contractors.
Building Finishing Contractors.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
EP30AU24.029
Core industry category
71028
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.K.1—IN-SCOPE CORE INDUSTRIES BY CORE INDUSTRY CATEGORIES—Continued
4-Digit
NAICS
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Core industry category
NAICS title
Construction ...........................................................
Construction ...........................................................
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries ................
Landscaping and Facilities Support .......................
Landscaping and Facilities Support .......................
Landscaping and Facilities Support .......................
Landscaping and Facilities Support .......................
Landscaping and Facilities Support .......................
Maintenance and Repair ........................................
Maintenance and Repair ........................................
238900
541300
812300
561200
561700
561900
812200
812900
811100
811300
Maintenance and Repair ........................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
811400
311100
311200
311300
311400
311500
311600
311700
311900
312100
312200
313100
313200
313300
314100
314900
315100
315200
315900
316100
316200
316900
321100
321200
321900
322100
322200
323100
324100
325100
325200
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
325300
325400
325500
325600
325900
326100
326200
327100
327200
327300
327400
327900
331100
331200
331300
331400
331500
332100
332200
332300
332400
332500
332600
332700
332800
332900
333100
333200
VerDate Sep<11>2014
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
.........................................................
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00332
Other Specialty Trade Contractors.
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services.
Drycleaning and Laundry Services.
Facilities Support Services.
Services to Buildings and Dwellings.
Other Support Services.
Death Care Services.
Other Personal Services.
Automotive Repair and Maintenance.
Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive
and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance.
Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance.
Animal Food Manufacturing.
Grain and Oilseed Milling.
Sugar and Confectionery Product Manufacturing.
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing.
Dairy Product Manufacturing.
Animal Slaughtering and Processing.
Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging.
Other Food Manufacturing.
Beverage Manufacturing.
Tobacco Manufacturing.
Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills.
Fabric Mills.
Textile and Fabric Finishing and Fabric Coating Mills.
Textile Furnishings Mills.
Other Textile Product Mills.
Apparel Knitting Mills.
Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing.
Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing.
Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing.
Footwear Manufacturing.
Other Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing.
Sawmills and Wood Preservation.
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing.
Other Wood Product Manufacturing.
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills.
Converted Paper Product Manufacturing.
Printing and Related Support Activities.
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing.
Basic Chemical Manufacturing.
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments
Manufacturing.
Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing.
Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Manufacturing.
Soap, Cleaning Compound, and Toilet Preparation Manufacturing.
Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing.
Plastics Product Manufacturing.
Rubber Product Manufacturing.
Clay Product and Refractory Manufacturing.
Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing.
Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing.
Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing.
Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing.
Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing.
Steel Product Manufacturing from Purchased Steel.
Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing.
Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Production and Processing.
Foundries.
Forging and Stamping.
Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing.
Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing.
Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing.
Hardware Manufacturing.
Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing.
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and Bolt Manufacturing.
Coating, Engraving, Heat Treating, and Allied Activities.
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing.
Agriculture, Construction, and Mining Machinery Manufacturing.
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
71029
TABLE VIII.K.1—IN-SCOPE CORE INDUSTRIES BY CORE INDUSTRY CATEGORIES—Continued
4-Digit
NAICS
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Core industry category
NAICS title
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
333300
333400
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Oil and Gas ............................................................
Oil and Gas ............................................................
Oil and Gas ............................................................
Oil and Gas ............................................................
Oil and Gas ............................................................
Postal and Delivery Services .................................
Postal and Delivery Services .................................
Postal and Delivery Services .................................
Recreation and Amusement ...................................
Recreation and Amusement ...................................
Recreation and Amusement ...................................
Recreation and Amusement ...................................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ..............................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ..............................
Sanitation and Waste Removal ..............................
Telecommunications ...............................................
Telecommunications ...............................................
Telecommunications ...............................................
Temporary Help Services .......................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Transportation ........................................................
Utilities ....................................................................
Utilities ....................................................................
Utilities ....................................................................
Warehousing ..........................................................
333500
333600
333900
335100
335200
335300
335900
336100
336200
336300
336400
336500
336600
336900
337100
337200
337900
339100
339900
211100
213100
486100
486200
486900
491100
492100
492200
711200
713100
713900
721200
562100
562200
562900
517100
517400
517800
561300
481100
481200
482100
483100
483200
484100
484200
485100
485900
488100
488200
488300
488400
488900
221100
221200
221300
493100
Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing.
Ventilation, Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.
Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing.
Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment Manufacturing.
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing.
Electric Lighting Equipment Manufacturing.
Household Appliance Manufacturing.
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing.
Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.
Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing.
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing.
Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing.
Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing.
Ship and Boat Building.
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing.
Household and Institutional Furniture and Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturing.
Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing.
Other Furniture Related Product Manufacturing.
Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing.
Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing.
Oil and Gas Extraction.
Support Activities for Mining.
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil.
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas.
Other Pipeline Transportation.
Postal Service.
Couriers and Express Delivery Services.
Local Messengers and Local Delivery.
Spectator Sports.
Amusement Parks and Arcades.
Other Amusement and Recreation Industries.
RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Recreational Camps.
Waste Collection.
Waste Treatment and Disposal.
Remediation and Other Waste Management Services.
Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite).
Satellite Telecommunications.
All Other Telecommunications.
Employment Services.
Scheduled Air Transportation.
Nonscheduled Air Transportation.
Rail Transportation.
Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation.
Inland Water Transportation.
General Freight Trucking.
Specialized Freight Trucking.
Urban Transit Systems.
Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation.
Support Activities for Air Transportation.
Support Activities for Rail Transportation.
Support Activities for Water Transportation.
Support Activities for Road Transportation.
Other Support Activities for Transportation.
Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution.
Natural Gas Distribution.
Water, Sewage and Other Systems.
Warehousing and Storage.
TABLE VIII.K.2—IN-SCOPE NON-CORE INDUSTRIES USED IN COST ANALYSIS
4-Digit NAICS
334100
334200
334300
334400
334500
334600
VerDate Sep<11>2014
NAICS title
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing.
Communications Equipment Manufacturing.
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing.
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing.
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing.
Manufacturing and Reproducing Magnetic and Optical Media.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00333
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71030
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.K.2—IN-SCOPE NON-CORE INDUSTRIES USED IN COST ANALYSIS—Continued
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
4-Digit NAICS
423100
423200
423400
423500
423600
423800
424100
424200
424300
424400
424500
424600
424700
424800
424900
425100
441100
441200
441300
444200
445100
445200
445300
449100
449200
455100
455200
456100
457100
457200
458100
458200
458300
459100
459200
459300
459400
459500
459900
485200
485300
485400
485500
487100
487200
487900
488500
512100
512200
513100
513200
516100
516200
518200
519200
521100
522100
522200
522300
523100
523200
523900
524100
524200
525100
525900
531100
531200
531300
532100
532200
532300
VerDate Sep<11>2014
NAICS title
Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Furniture and Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers.
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Metal and Mineral (except Petroleum) Merchant Wholesalers.
Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
Paper and Paper Product Merchant Wholesalers.
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers.
Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers.
Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers.
Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers.
Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers.
Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers.
Beer, Wine, and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant Wholesalers.
Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers.
Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers.
Automobile Dealers.
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers.
Automotive Parts, Accessories, and Tire Retailers.
Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Retailers.
Grocery and Convenience Retailers.
Specialty Food Retailers.
Beer, Wine, and Liquor Retailers.
Furniture and Home Furnishings Retailers.
Electronics and Appliance Retailers.
Department Stores.
Warehouse Clubs, Supercenters, and Other General Merchandise Retailers.
Health and Personal Care Retailers.
Gasoline Stations.
Fuel Dealers.
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Retailers.
Shoe Retailers.
Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Retailers.
Sporting Goods, Hobby, and Musical Instrument Retailers.
Book Retailers and News Dealers.
Florists.
Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Retailers.
Used Merchandise Retailers.
Other Miscellaneous Retailers.
Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation.
Taxi and Limousine Service.
School and Employee Bus Transportation.
Charter Bus Industry.
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land.
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water.
Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other.
Freight Transportation Arrangement.
Motion Picture and Video Industries.
Sound Recording Industries.
Newspaper, Periodical, Book, and Directory Publishers.
Software Publishers.
Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations.
Media Streaming Distribution Services, Social Networks, and Other Media Networks and Content Providers.
Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services.
Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and Other Information Services.
Monetary Authorities-Central Bank.
Depository Credit Intermediation.
Nondepository Credit Intermediation.
Activities Related to Credit Intermediation.
Securities and Commodity Contracts Intermediation and Brokerage.
Securities and Commodity Exchanges.
Other Financial Investment Activities.
Insurance Carriers.
Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities.
Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds.
Other Investment Pools and Funds.
Lessors of Real Estate.
Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers.
Activities Related to Real Estate.
Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing.
Consumer Goods Rental.
General Rental Centers.
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00334
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
71031
TABLE VIII.K.2—IN-SCOPE NON-CORE INDUSTRIES USED IN COST ANALYSIS—Continued
4-Digit NAICS
533100
541100
541200
541400
541500
541600
541700
541800
541900
551100
561100
561400
561500
561600
611100
611200
611300
611400
611500
611600
611700
621100
621200
621300
621400
621500
621600
621900
622100
622200
622300
623100
623200
623300
623900
624100
624200
624300
624400
711100
711300
711400
711500
712100
713200
721100
721300
811200
812100
813100
813200
813300
813400
813900
999200
999300
NAICS title
Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works).
Legal Services.
Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services.
Specialized Design Services.
Computer Systems Design and Related Services.
Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services.
Scientific Research and Development Services.
Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services.
Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.
Management of Companies and Enterprises.
Office Administrative Services.
Business Support Services.
Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services.
Investigation and Security Services.
Elementary and Secondary Schools.
Junior Colleges.
Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools.
Business Schools and Computer and Management Training.
Technical and Trade Schools.
Other Schools and Instruction.
Educational Support Services.
Offices of Physicians.
Offices of Dentists.
Offices of Other Health Practitioners.
Outpatient Care Centers.
Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories.
Home Health Care Services.
Other Ambulatory Health Care Services.
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals.
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals.
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities).
Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability, Mental Health, and Substance Abuse Facilities.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly.
Other Residential Care Facilities.
Individual and Family Services.
Community Food and Housing, and Emergency and Other Relief Services.
Vocational Rehabilitation Services.
Child Care Services.
Performing Arts Companies.
Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events.
Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers, and Other Public Figures.
Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers.
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions.
Gambling Industries.
Traveler Accommodation.
Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers’ Camps.
Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance.
Personal Care Services.
Religious Organizations.
Grantmaking and Giving Services.
Social Advocacy Organizations.
Civic and Social Organizations.
Business, Professional, Labor, Political, and Similar Organizations.
State Government.
Local Government.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
IX. Technological Feasibility
A. Introduction
The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) is proposing a
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
standard that will require employers,
whose employees are occupationally
exposed to hazardous heat, to develop
and implement a heat injury and illness
prevention plan. As part of the plan,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
this proposed standard will require
employers to implement control
measures to mitigate the risk to workers
from occupational exposure to heat
when temperatures exceed specified
triggers.
As discussed in Section II., Pertinent
Legal Authority, OSHA must prove, by
substantial evidence in the rulemaking
record, that its standards are
technologically and economically
PO 00000
Frm 00335
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
feasible, which the Supreme Court has
defined as ‘‘capable of being done,
executed, or effected’’ (American Textile
Mfrs. Inst. v. Donovan (Cotton Dust),
452 U.S. 490, 508–09 (1981)). A
standard is technologically feasible if
the protective measures it requires
already exist, can be brought into
existence with available technology, or
can be created with technology that can
reasonably be expected to be developed
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71032
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(United Steelworkers v. Marshall (Lead
I), 647 F.2d 1189, 1272 (D.C. Cir, 1980),
cert. denied, 453 U.S. 913 (1981); Am.
Iron & Steel Inst. v. Occupational Safety
& Health Admin. (Lead II), 939 F.2d
975, 980 (D.C. Cir. 1991)). OSHA has
reviewed the requirements that would
be imposed by the proposed Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention standard and
assessed the technological feasibility of
complying with its requirements. As a
result of this review, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that achieving
compliance with the proposed standard
is technologically feasible.
B. Methodology
For this proposed standard, OSHA
evaluated the provisions to identify
which requirements proposed the
implementation of engineering control
measures or would address facility and
equipment related aspects of heat illness
prevention, as opposed to those that
would establish programs, processes, or
procedures. OSHA also reviewed the
workplace control practices currently in
place across the affected industries as
well as the recommended practices of
industry trade associations and
standards-setting organizations.
For this technological feasibility
analysis, OSHA grouped establishments
by indoor work settings based on the
similarity of worker exposure sources
(i.e., equipment or processes that
generate heat versus ambient heat) and
outdoor work settings, including mobile
or transient sites, with exposure
primarily to ambient heat and heatgenerating processes. These work
settings, and examples of occupations
found in these settings, are outlined in
table IX–1 below.
TABLE IX–1—FACILITY TYPES ANALYZED IN OSHA’S PRELIMINARY TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Work setting
Heat source
Example facility types/occupations
Indoors .................................
Heat Generating Processes ............................................
Ambient Heat ..................................................................
Outdoors ..............................
Ambient Heat at Fixed Locations ....................................
Ambient Heat at Transient and Mobile Work Sites ........
Heat Generating Processes ............................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. Environmental Monitoring
The proposed rule includes
requirements for employers to monitor
environmental conditions in order to
determine whether certain controls to
protect employees exposed to heat at or
above the trigger level, expressed in
terms of heat index or wet bulb globe
temperature (WBGT), need to be
implemented. The proposed rule also
requires employers utilizing fans in
indoor work areas or break areas to
identify any such areas where the
ambient temperature (AT) exceeds 102
°F in order to evaluate whether fan use
may be harmful. As part of OSHA’s
assessment of the technological
feasibility of these proposed
requirements, the agency must
determine whether available methods
exist for measuring heat index, WBGT,
and AT. As explained below, all three
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
•
•
•
•
Commercial Laundry and Drycleaning
Commercial Kitchens
Foundries
Manufacturing (Paper Mills, Wood
Chemical Processing)
• Maintenance and Repair Service
• Warehouses
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sales Related Industries
Airline Ground Workers
Building Material and Equipment Suppliers
Maintenance and Repair Service
Recreation and Amusement
Sales Related Industries
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
Construction
Landscaping and Facilities Support
Logging/Forestry
Oil and Gas Extraction and Support Service
Postal and Delivery Services
Sanitation and Waste Removal
Transportation (Land, Water, and Rail), including
Scenic and Sightseeing
• Telecommunications and Utility Workers
• Asphalt Paving
• Cement Kilns
metrics can be monitored via
instruments currently on the market.
I. Heat Index
Heat Index (HI) is meant to reflect the
temperature that the body ‘‘feels,’’ by
combining ambient temperature and
either dew point temperature, or more
commonly relative humidity (RH)
(Anderson et al., 2013; NWS, 2024c;
Steadman, 1979). The underlying
formula for heat index is complex and
uses several assumptions, including
human body mass and height, clothing,
amount of physical activity, individual
heat tolerance, sunlight and ultraviolet
radiation exposure, and wind speed. In
the HI formula, the coefficients have
been determined through empirical
studies and mathematical modeling to
approximate how humidity influences
the effect of temperature. Different
coefficients can vary depending on the
PO 00000
Frm 00336
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Processing,
unit of temperature and the formula
might differ slightly between regions or
meteorological agencies.
While calculating HI involves a fairly
complex equation, methods for
determining the HI using the ambient
temperature (AT) and RH are widely
available and simple to use. The most
accurate way to determine the HI at
work sites is through the use of direct
read monitoring devices. These types of
devices are readily available on the
market (ERG, 2024b). The handheld
devices, commonly called heat-stress
monitors or heat index monitors,
measure the AT, RH, and dew point,
and provide the HI. These devices
provide real-time, on-site measurements
and can be used both indoors and
outdoors. Conversely employers could
use psychrometers and thermometers to
measure AT and RH, then calculate the
HI using any of the tools described
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
below. Both psychrometers and
thermometers are available in digital
and analog versions. For outdoor work
sites, employers could also use local
forecast weather data to obtain the AT
and RH. This information can then be
used to estimate the HI for a particular
location using available charts and
calculators. However, because local
forecast conditions may not reflect
actual working conditions indoors,
OSHA is not proposing to permit the
use of forecast data to determine indoor
HI.
The National Weather Service (NWS)
has two charts available on their website
which employers can use to determine
the HI, the Heat Index Chart and the
Heat Index Chart for Low Humidity
Locations.135 The Heat Index Charts can
be used for environments with RH
ranging from 5% to 100%. To find the
HI using the chart the employer must
first determine the AT and RH. The HI
is located in the cell where the two
values meet on the chart. The National
Weather Service (NWS) also has a
calculator available on their website that
allows users to calculate HI by entering
in the temperature and humidity or dew
point.136 However, this calculator notes
that results using temperatures and RH
outside of the range of the NWS heat
index chart may not be accurate.
Another way employers can
determine the HI is through the OSHA–
NIOSH Heat Safety Tool,137 which
allows users to access HI data from a
mobile phone. The Heat Safety Tool
pulls hourly forecasts specific to the
inputted outdoor location from the NWS
to estimate the local heat index. This
tool is available for both Android and
Apple mobile devices and can be
downloaded from the app stores, as well
as the OSHA website. As previously
mentioned, while the tool is useful for
outdoor work environments, local
weather data may not accurately reflect
indoor working conditions or situations
where heat is also generated as part of
the work process.
OSHA has preliminarily concluded
that conducting exposure assessments to
determine the HI is technologically
feasible for most operations, most of the
time.138 HI is simple, easy-tounderstand, and easily accessible. For
135 The NWS charts contain risk categories that
may not align with the proposed rule as OSHA is
not relying on the risk categories noted in the chart.
136 https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/html/
heatindex.shtml.
137 https://www.osha.gov/heat/heat-app.
138 OSHA notes that Oregon currently uses HI
thresholds in its state standard, which is further
evidence that the measurements are feasible. OR
Admin. Code 437–002–0156 (indoor and outdoor)
and 437–004–1131 (agriculture).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
indoor workplaces employers will need
to take on-site measurements to
determine the HI. This can be done
using either direct reading instruments
currently on the market or by measuring
AT and RH with psychrometers and
thermometers and using charts or online
calculators to calculate the HI. OSHA
seeks additional information and
comments on the feasibility of
measuring HI in different environments,
including indoor environments and
where heat-generating processes occur.
II. Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT)
WBGT is a measure of heat exposure
that incorporates the impact of sunlight
and wind, in addition to temperature
and humidity. It was derived in the
1950s to track exposure and limit heatrelated illness (HRI) among the U.S.
Armed Services (Budd, 2008). WBGT is
calculated as the weighted average of
globe temperature, wet bulb
temperature, and dry bulb temperature,
and accounts for AT, RH, wind speed,
and solar radiation. WBGTs are
measured with specialized equipment
currently available on the market.
Indeed, both NIOSH REL’s and
ACGIH TLV’s for heat stress are based
on WBGT readings. Also, OSHA
currently collects WBGT readings
during inspections to evaluate the
potential hazard from exposure to heat
in accordance with procedures for
performing workplace assessments in
the OSHA Technical Manual (OTM),
section III., chapter 4.
A standard WBGT instrument has a
0.15-meter, or 6-inch, black globe to
measure globe temperature and a wetted
thermometer to measure the natural wet
bulb temperature (Budd, 2008). Various
WBGT monitors have been developed,
many of which use a smaller black globe
and/or a relative humidity sensor in
place of a wetted thermometer. Relative
humidity measurements are used to
calculate wet bulb temperature based on
psychometric principles. Some wellknown WBGT monitors include the
QUESTemp series by TSI and smaller
handheld devices such as that made by
Kestrel (ERG, 2024b).
Although several accurate WBGT
monitoring devices are available, OSHA
notes that some lower-cost devices may
not be sufficient to accurately measure
employees’ heat exposure. Non-standard
monitors can be found for a lower cost,
but they may not fully align with
traditional WBGT thermometer
measurements. Some devices may be
designed to be more conservative in
their measurements than others. In a
review of WBGT, Budd (2008) identified
key limitations of this standard
equipment to measure WBGT. Four of
PO 00000
Frm 00337
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71033
the main concerns were inconsistent
equilibration times, insufficiently robust
calibration procedures, and the use of
non-standard globe thermometers and
natural wet bulb thermometers. Smaller
bulbs typically result in shorter
equilibration times, which make
readings more sensitive to short-term
changes in environmental conditions
than larger bulbs. However, few peerreviewed studies have been published
evaluating these potential sources of
error and OSHA anticipates technology
has likely improved since Budd’s
evaluation in 2008. Given these
technical considerations—including
equilibration times and the need for
robust calibration procedures—the use
of WBGT on-site will require training to
properly operate. The extent of the
training would vary depending on the
type of monitor.
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that instruments to accurately monitor
WBGT are commercially available.
OSHA seeks additional comments on
the use of WBGT and to identify
situations in which WBGT would or
would not be practical or pose
challenges for employers to measure.
III. Ambient Temperature (AT)
AT is the air temperature measured
using a thermometer. The primary types
of thermometers used for measuring AT
are liquid-in-glass thermometers,
electrical thermocouples, and resistance
thermometers (thermistors). Each of
these types of thermometers are
commercially available in a wide variety
of designs. The States with permanent
outdoor occupational heat standards,
California and Washington, currently
use fixed value thresholds of AT, further
indicating the feasibility of this metric
(California Occupational Safety &
Health Administration, 8 CCR 3395;
Washington Division of Occupational
Safety and Health, WA Admin. Code
296–62–095). Based on the widespread
public availability of thermometers to
measure AT, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that it is technologically
feasible for employers to assess AT in
their workplace.
IV. Preliminary Findings on
Environmental Monitoring
Several different types of instruments
and methods to determine the Heat
Index and WBGT are commercially
available. These include the Kestrel and
QuesTemp currently used by OSHA, in
addition to various mobile device
applications supported by NWS and
NIOSH. At outdoor work sites,
employers have the option of tracking
local heat index forecasts provided by
the NWS or other reputable sources in
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71034
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lieu of measuring for Heat Index or
WBGT. In addition, thermometers to
measure AT are widely available.
Because the technology necessary to
comply with the proposed standard
currently exists and is commercially
available, OSHA preliminarily
concludes that the proposed standard’s
monitoring requirements are
technologically feasible.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Engineering Controls
Engineering controls are measures
that reduce, isolate, or remove a hazard
from the workplace. These engineering
controls can be used to reduce exposure
to heat without relying on changes in
employee behavior. Therefore,
engineering controls are often the most
effective type of control to address
workplace hazards and can also be a
cost-effective layer of protection. The
following are some examples of
engineering controls that may reduce
heat stress:
• Use air-conditioning,
• Increase general ventilation,
• Provide cooling fans,139
• Run local exhaust ventilation where
heat is produced (e.g., laundry vents),
• Use reflective shields to block
radiant heat,
• Insulate hot surfaces (e.g., furnace
walls),
• Stop leaking steam,
• Provide shade for outdoor work
sites.
Under the proposed standard, when
exposures to heat exceed specified
triggers, employers must implement
feasible controls to reduce employee’s
exposures to heat. The requirements for
the use of engineering controls differ
based on the location of work, whether
indoors or outdoors. For indoor work
sites, employers are required to provide
a break area and ensure that work areas
exceeding the trigger are equipped with
air-conditioning, fans and ventilation, or
in the case of radiant heat, other
controls to reduce heat exposure. For
outdoor work sites, employers are
required to provide a break area with
either shade or air-conditioning.
I. Workers Exposed to Heat Generating
Process
As shown in Table IX–1—Facility
Types Analyzed in OSHA’s Preliminary
Technological Feasibility Analysis,
employees in both indoor and outdoor
work operations can be exposed to heat
from work processes. Radiant heat can
be generated by equipment and
processes such as, but not limited to,
cement kilns, asphalt paving equipment,
139 It should be noted that under certain
conditions the use of fans may contribute to heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
commercial laundry machines, ovens in
kitchen and bakery operations,
foundries and other furnaces, and steam
pipes. Under the proposed rule, OSHA
is requiring employers to cool each
indoor work area using either controls
that increase evaporative heat loss from
the worker (such as air-conditioning or
fans) or through controls that remove
the worker’s exposure to radiant heat in
the workspace. Because OSHA
anticipates that the use of fans,
dehumidifiers, and air-conditioning to
control exposures from heat generating
processes will be implemented in a
similar manner to those controlling for
ambient temperature exposures, the
discussion on feasibility of those
controls is contained in Section
IX.D.II.A, Indoor Workspaces. OSHA
requests comments on the
appropriateness of this determination
and seeks information on situations
where the use of fans and airconditioning would differ.
The engineering approaches to
controlling radiant heat gain to the
worker can be divided into two
categories, those that reduce the amount
of radiant heat in the workspace or
those that shield the worker from the
radiant heat source itself. Researchers
suggest the following actions for
reducing radiant heat exposures:
interpose line-of-sight barriers;
insulation, reflective shield and/or
metallic reflecting screen, heat reflective
clothing; mechanical ventilation (fans,
blowers, chillers, etc.), air-conditioning
where possible, and locating hot process
away from work areas (NIOSH, 2016;
Chesson, 2012).
Reducing radiant heat in the
workspaces typically requires at least
one of the following actions: lowering
the process temperature, which may not
be compatible with the temperature
requirement of the manufacturing
processes; relocating or isolating the
heat source; insulating or cooling the
heat source; or changing the emissivity
of the hot surface by coating the
material. Engineering controls for
shielding the work from the radiant heat
requires placing line-of-sight radiant
reflective barriers or shielding between
the heat source and the worker.
Of these control methods, radiant
reflective shielding is generally the
easiest to install. NIOSH notes that
radiant reflective shielding can reduce
the radiant heat load by as much as 80%
to 85% (NIOSH, 2016). Employers who
choose to install shielding will need to
consider work process flows so that
placement does not interfere with the
work. Remotely operated tongs, metal
chain screens, or air or hydraulically
activated doors that are opened only as
needed are some of the possibilities.
Isolating the source could involve
construction of walls or other
containment around hot equipment or
process such as erecting barriers around
a kiln that control heat transfer to
nearby work areas (NIOSH, 2016).
Morris et al. noted that ‘‘investigations
into reducing the solar (radiative) heat
load on workers is promising, revealing
that work capacity can be more than
doubled with the removal of an external
radiative load,’’ and further explained
that radiation screens can be used
within manufacturing shops to shield
workers from heat originating from hot
machinery (Morris et al., 2020). Another
example of isolating the source would
be installing insulation around pipes
and similar equipment in the workplace
that emits heat. Similarly, because leaks
from steam valves and steam lines in
manufacturing processes can contribute
to heat stress by increasing water vapor
in the air, eliminating these sources of
water vapor can help reduce the overall
vapor pressure in the air and thereby
increase evaporative heat loss by
facilitating the rate of evaporation of
sweat from the skin (NIOSH, 2016).
OSHA requests comments and data on
other methods employers have utilized
to isolate radiant heat from heatgenerating processes.
Examples of waste heat recovery
technology include recovery of heat
from steam through condensation that
would otherwise be released into the
workspace. Heat recovery systems
improve energy efficiency by utilizing
heat transfer from hot liquids or gases
and recover heat that would otherwise
go to waste. Some commercial building
ventilation systems use heat exchangers
to transfer heat from exhaust air to the
fresh intake air (NIOSH, 2016).
With regards to modifying the process
or operation, OSHA notes that lowering
the process temperature may not be
compatible with process requirements.
However, there might be ways of using
materials with lower melting points or
chemicals with faster curing times
thereby reducing overall radiant heat
production. This might also include
modifying the process and work
practices by limiting the time required
to complete certain tasks or automating
certain tasks, such as collecting
samples.
strain (Morris, 2021). See further discussion in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (e)(6), Evaluation of fan use.
PO 00000
Frm 00338
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
71035
TABLE IX–2—HEAT GENERATING PROCESS CONTROLS
Controls
Local exhaust
sources.
ventilation
Examples
(LEV)
at
heat-generating
Installation of waste heat recovery technology ..................
Isolating the source of radiant heat ...................................
Shielding or barriers that are radiant-reflecting or heatabsorbing.
Thermal insulation on hot surfaces (e.g., steam pipes) ....
Increasing the distance between workers and the heat
source.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Preliminary Feasibility Finding for
Heat Generating Processes.
The proposed rule does not specify
which of the engineering controls must
be used for indoor workplaces. It only
requires that employers implement
other measures that reduce employee
exposure to radiant heat in the work
area as an alternative option to the use
of fans or air-conditioning. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that there are
a number of technologically feasible
engineering controls available to
employers. Employers are free to choose
any combination that effectively reduces
exposures. Based on the discussion
above, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that there are no
technological hurdles to compliance
with this requirement for indoor
workplaces.
OSHA acknowledges the limited
information available on working
outdoors near heat generating processes.
OSHA seeks information and data on
whether and under what circumstances
the control options used to reduce
exposure to radiant heat in indoor work
areas might also be feasible for outdoor
work settings.
II. Workers Exposed to Ambient Heat
A. Indoor Workplaces
Employees in indoor workplaces,
such as maintenance facilities, and
warehousing, can be exposed to HRIs
when ambient temperatures increase.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
• LEV designed and installed at points of high heat or moisture production (such as
exhaust hoods in laundry rooms or steam presses, commercial kitchen exhaust
hoods).
• Similar to LEV used to capture air contaminants. Dampeners and hood vary depending on moisture level of air.
• Used with LEV to convert heat to energy that is fed back into the system.
Æ Regenerative and recuperative burners: Capture and use the waste heat from
the hot flue gas from the combustion process.
Æ Tube heat exchangers: Recover low to medium waste heat are mainly used
for heating liquids.
• Process enclosures around heat producing components.
• Containment of heat producing equipment in rooms without workers.
• Shielding to stop radiant heat from reaching workstations.
Æ Reflective Shield: Stainless steel, aluminum or other bright metal surfaces reflect heat back towards the source.
Æ Absorbent shields: Water-cooled jackets made of black-surfaced aluminum
absorb and carry away heat.
• Reducing the radiant heat emission from hot surfaces.
Æ Covering hot surfaces with sheets of low emissivity material or paint that reduces the amount of heat radiated from this hot surface into the workplace.
• Insulating Hot Surfaces.
Æ Insulation reduces the heat exchange between the source of heat and the
work environment.
• Moving the workstation further away from the heat source.
• Repositioning controls a cooler location.
See Table IX–1—Facility Types
Analyzed in OSHA’s Preliminary
Technological Feasibility Analysis. Due
to factors such as building materials,
insulation, and reduced air movement,
the air temperatures in indoor
workplaces without air-conditioning
can in some cases exceed the
temperature outdoors. The proposed
rule would require that employers
reduce these exposures by utilizing
controls to cool the work area and
provide a break area that is airconditioned or has an alternate means of
providing air movement and, if
appropriate, humidity control to
promote evaporative and convective
cooling.
In response to the advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) and
previous Requests for Information (RFI),
OSHA received numerous comments on
the use of engineering controls for
preventing heat-related injury and
illness in both indoor and outdoor work
settings. The most mentioned
engineering controls were the provision
of air-conditioning, fans, swamp coolers
(i.e., evaporative coolers), portable airconditioners, access to air-conditioned
zones, air-conditioned tents/trailers and
shaded areas. (e.g., Document ID 0094;
0206; 0278, Att. 1; 0392; 0448, Att. 1;
0523, Att. 1; 0551; 0562; 0588; 0610,
Att. 1; 0637, Att. 1: 0679, Att. 1). Some
commenters mentioned specific types of
devices that could be used, such as
portable air-conditioning units and
PO 00000
Frm 00339
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
evaporative coolers. (e.g., Document ID
0445; 0595, Att. 1; 0612, Att. 1). For
preventing humid working conditions,
commenters suggested the use of
dehumidifiers. (Document ID 0661, Att.
1). OSHA discusses of the feasibility of
these controls below.
Some commenters suggested other
controls, such as architectural controls
like altering roofs to reflect solar
radiation using reflective materials,
green roofs, rooftop sprinklers, or
painting roofs white. Also suggested
was the use of light-colored building
material, green infrastructure, pervious
pavements, external awnings, and
window coverings to aid in mitigating
indoor heat. While OSHA understands
that the use of these controls may assist
an employer in reducing ambient heat
exposures in the workplace, this
analysis focuses on the engineering
controls outlined specifically in the
regulatory text of the proposed rule.
OSHA notes, however, that the
proposed standard does not prohibit the
use of other controls in addition those
specified in the standard.
I. Air-Conditioning
Air-conditioning is one of the options
to control heat in the workplace and is
the most effective way to reduce heat
strain because it reduces the heat
exposure directly (Day et al., 2019; Jay
et al., 2019; Morris et al., 2020;
Morrissey et al., 2021b). Airconditioning technology is widely
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71036
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
available and currently in use in many
workplaces. However, OSHA
understands that the use of airconditioning to address heat hazards
may not be practical in all occupational
settings, such as outdoors or in large
factories, and alternative control
strategies need to be implemented
(Foster et al., 2020; Mekjavic et al., n.d.;
Morris et al., 2020).
HEAT-SHIELD, a research program
funded by the European Union,
evaluated strategies for the reduction of
heat illness in the manufacturing
industry (Mekjavic et al., n.d.).
Researchers from the Heat Shield
project successfully implemented
several heat stress mitigating strategies
within a manufacturing plant producing
automobile rear lights. To aid in
enhanced evaporative heat loss by the
workers, the production hall was fitted
with a system of ducts to increase the
cooling air flow to the production hall
and local workstations. The ducts were
installed so that the air flow in the plant
could be individually adjusted at the
local workstations; alternatively,
individual workers could also use an
electrical fan in proximity to their
workstation to increase the air flow
(Mekjavic et al., n.d.). The study does
not indicate what method of cooling
was used to cool the air provided
(conditioned, evaporative cooling, etc.).
However, OSHA believes that similar
designs could be implemented in
manufacturing facilities using
conditioned air.
In response to the ANPRM, some
commenters stated that temperature
controls or air-conditioning systems are
not feasible in many industrial settings
and in large industrial plants that
include tens of thousands of square feet
of floor space, specifically foundries,
forge shops, and other workplaces with
hot work processes (e.g., Document ID
0277). Bakeries and dairy product
manufacturers were specifically
mentioned as having unique
circumstances because of the need to
offset carbon monoxide and heat
emitted during the baking or production
process for employee safety, and due to
food safety concerns (Document ID
0699, Att. 1). Another commenter added
that environmental temperature controls
may not be feasible in some areas that
are designed to be open or partially
open to the outside. Installing airconditioning in all work areas would
not be physically possible and could be
cost prohibitive (Document ID 0657, Att.
1; 0684, Att. 1; 710, Att. 1; 0724, Att. 1).
This sentiment was also echoed in
available literature. Mekjavic et al.
noted that due to design elements of
some manufacturing facilities, such as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
minimal insulation, the economic
burden renders the installation of
facility wide air-conditioning as not
possible (Mekjavic et al., n.d.). OSHA
understands this concern and is
therefore not requiring all employers to
install air-conditioning throughout their
facility.
However, OSHA recognizes that airconditioning can be installed in some
indoor locations and is effective at
reducing the exposure to ambient heat
in the workplace. A feasibility study
presented at the 10th International
Livestock Environment Symposium
compared the costs and benefits of airconditioning to an evaporative cooling
system in a large dairy barn (measuring
43.3m by 25.6m) (Li et al., 2018). The
researchers simulated summer
conditions in barns across Tampa, FL;
Sacramento, CA; Syracuse, NY; and
Madison, WI. They determined that airconditioning was capable of
maintaining maximum indoor
temperatures of 23 °C to 27.4 °C (74.3 °F
to 81.3 °F) (Li et al., 2018).
Another study conducted by
Morrissey et al. (2021b) provided a flow
chart for selecting appropriate heat
controls and included air-conditioning
as a recommended option for all work
sites with access to power. Anderson
and Souza (2017) specifically identify
air-conditioning (i.e., bulk air cooling,
spot air coolers, and air-conditioned
cabins) as a heat management strategy
for underground mines. In addition,
several commenters on the ANPRM
noted that some indoor facilities do
provide areas for employees to take
breaks in temperature-controlled
environments, indicating that an airconditioned break area is capable of
being installed for cooling in indoor
work environments (Document ID 0612,
p. 2; 0680, p. 10; 0691, pp. 10–11; 0777,
Att. 2, p. 33; 1071, p. 2; 1072, pp. 1, 4).
Despite common statements of its
efficacy in review articles and studies,
air-conditioning as a control to reduce
heat exposure at the workplace is not
commonly evaluated in the
occupational setting. It is unclear if the
very definition of air-conditioning (an
approach that directly removes heat) or
feasibility limitations might explain the
limited nature of this body of literature.
Therefore, OSHA is seeking information
regarding the current use of airconditioning in the industries covered
under the scope of the rulemaking.
II. Humidity Control
For indoor work sites, OSHA is
proposing to require employers who do
not provide air-conditioned break areas
or workspaces to implement humidity
control (when appropriate) in
PO 00000
Frm 00340
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
conjunction with some form of air
movement in those spaces. An article by
D. Jeff Burton, P.E. CIH, published in
the Occupational Health and Safety
magazine reviewed the use of
dehumidification to maintain acceptable
indoor air quality in occupational
settings (Burton, 2006). In addition to
dehumidification approaches utilizing
existing HVAC systems, the article
noted that stand-alone dehumidifiers
are commercially available and can be
used where HVAC systems do not
effectively control humidity (Burton,
2006). Indeed, OSHA expects that in
most cases employers will use one of
the many stand-alone dehumidifier
models on the market to achieve the
humidity control required by the
proposed standard. In addition, in
facilities with processes that produce
moisture, exhaust systems can often be
used to remove moist air and eliminate
humidity gain.
III. Fans
Another engineering control
identified by OSHA is the use of fans to
help circulate air. Fans do not
necessarily lower temperature but can
make it easier for the body to dissipate
heat. Depending on the work setting,
fans can be used before work, during
work, or during rest breaks. Information
contained in the rulemaking docket
indicates fans can be easily
implemented in a variety of work
environments. Large ceiling fans can be
installed to increase air movement. In
certain facilities, pedestal fans can be
used to provide air movement at
workstations. Some commenters
mentioned that they use fans for air
circulation in indoor facilities (e.g.,
Document ID 0277, 0283). During the
SBREFA hearings, one SER reported
that they open the doors in the
mornings and use large ceiling fans to
draw cooler air into the building, and
then shut the doors in the afternoons to
reduce the infiltration of hot outside air
into the building. (Document ID 1081, p.
29).
Several studies evaluated by OSHA
indicate that fan usage in industrial
settings is prevalent. A recent J.J. Keller
Center for Market Insights Pulse Poll
indicates that 65% of employers provide
fans, ventilation, or reflective shields to
help control exposures to heat stress (JJ
Keller, 2022).
As mentioned above, HEAT-SHIELD
evaluated strategies for the reduction of
heat illness in the manufacturing
industry (Mekjavic et al., n.d.). To aid in
enhanced evaporative heat loss by the
workers, the production hall was fitted
with a system of ducts to increase the
cooling air flow to the production hall
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and local workstations. In addition,
some workers utilized electrical fans in
proximity to their individual
workstations to increase the air flow
(Mekjavic et al., n.d.).
A 2021 study by Morris et al.
determined that facilitated ventilation,
through the use of electric fans,
supports convective and/or evaporative
heat loss and lowers occupational heat
strain at a considerably lower operation
and production cost compared to airconditioning. The authors noted that
fans were also easier to personalize
cooling by directing air flow towards
specific workers, rather than cooling an
entire area; they could be transported to
remote workspaces and could be used
both during work and at specific cooling
areas where workers take intermittent
cooling breaks (Morris et al., 2021).
Fans have even been incorporated
into chairs as demonstrated by
Watanabe et al. (2009). In this study,
researchers evaluated thermal comfort
using chairs with attached fans under
various climactic conditions, while
participants performed light office tasks
such as word processing. One control
chair and two ‘‘fan chair’’ designs were
assessed; each ‘‘fan chair’’ had a fan
under the seat and behind the backrest
and received a positive response from
the worker. Morris et al. (2020) also
noted the relevance of chair fans, stating
that ‘‘miniature electrical fans could be
incorporated into chairs, for seated
workers, to deliver effective cooling
while minimizing disturbances to the
work environment’’ (Morris et al., 2020).
There is an additional body of
research investigating fans as a heat
control in large dairy barns due to the
sensitivity of cow productivity to heat
stress. Although not directly applicable
to HRI reduction in humans, as with airconditioning described above, this
research provides insight into the extent
to which industrial fans can be installed
in large barn or warehouse-like
structures (Calegari et al., 2012; CorreaCalderon et al., 2004; Davidson et al.,
2021; Drwencke et al., 2020; Ortiz et al.,
2010; Shiao et al., 2011; Urdaz et al.,
2006).
Evidence of the existing use of fans in
occupational settings can be seen in
existing State requirements and in some
collective bargaining agreements. For
example, Minnesota’s standard
governing indoor ventilation and
temperature includes a provision for
providing indoor ventilation and
acceptable temperature ranges in places
of employment to prevent employee
exposure to indoor environmental heat
conditions (MN Admin. Code
5205.0110). In addition, comments from
the Teamsters in response to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
ANPRM included examples of collective
bargaining agreements that demonstrate
steps employers have taken to address
occupational HRIs (Document ID 0707,
pp. 14–17). Items included provisions
for work area ventilation when the plant
is hot and the installation of fans to
reduce excess heat or humidity in work
rooms. Employers covered under these
agreements may already be in
compliance with some of the
requirements of the proposal.
Although fan use can be effective at
reducing heat stress, fans may introduce
additional hazards in some workplaces
due to the increase in air movement. In
indoor settings where air contamination
is a concern, the use of fans may
interfere with existing ventilation and
increase worker exposure to hazards.
OSHA acknowledges that in some cases,
the work site may need to be evaluated
to ensure that the use of fans does not
interfere with existing ventilation
designed for the control of dust and
other air contaminants. OSHA seeks
comments on work settings where the
use of fans is not feasible due to
contamination concerns and requests
additional information on what
controls, including the use of airconditioning, employers use to prevent
heat-related illnesses in these settings.
In addition, research has shown that
under certain conditions (e.g., high
temperatures), fan use can increase the
hazard of heat strain. See Section V.C.,
Risk Reduction for a more detailed
discussion of fan use alone during
elevated temperature events. OSHA
requests comments on indoor work
settings that may experience
temperatures above 102°F and seeks
information on what controls employers
implement when fan use is
contraindicated or when temperatures
exceed 102 °F.
IV. Evaporative Coolers
Another engineering control,
evaporative coolers, work by using a fan
to pass air over a pad or ceramic surface
saturated with water. The evaporation of
the water reduces the air temperature. In
warm dry climates, evaporative coolers
can be used to lower air temperatures as
much as 20 °F (USGS). They consume
much less energy than air-conditioning
and can be used in buildings with
openings to the outside. However,
because evaporative coolers cool
through increasing air humidity, they
are not as effective at relative humidity
above 60%.
A NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation
(HHE) conducted in September 2006
demonstrates the feasibility of
evaporative cooler use in indoor
workspaces. The evaluation was
PO 00000
Frm 00341
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71037
conducted at a glass manufacturing
facility in Indiana. In the hot end of the
glass-making process, raw materials
(recycled glass, sand, soda ash, and
limestone) were melted together in a gas
furnace at temperatures of 2,300 °F to
2,800 °F (Dowell & Tapp, 2007). The
company used various controls in the
hot end of the plant during the hot
summer months to reduce the risk of
heat-related illness. The controls
included fans which supplied cooler air
from the basement of the facility (man
coolers), and evaporative cooling fans
(swamp coolers) (Dowell & Tapp, 2007).
Furthermore, portable evaporative
coolers are also commercially available
for use expanding the ability for
implementation in various work
settings. These coolers can lower air
temperatures by up to 18 °C (33 °F) and
cover up to 6,500 sq ft area, requiring
only a power outlet and water supply.
V. Preliminary Feasibility Finding for
Indoor Workplaces
OSHA has determined that
requirements for the use of engineering
controls indoors under the proposed
standard are technologically feasible for
most operations, most of the time. For
break areas, the proposed rule allows
employers to utilize available airconditioning systems or a combination
of air movement and humidity control
to promote evaporative cooling. The
latter can be achieved with widely
available fans and humidity control
devices. For indoor work areas, OSHA
has provided the employer with
multiple control options for compliance
with the proposed rule, allowing them
to tailor the controls to the individual
workplaces. Information obtained
through the SBREFA process,
comments, and research into existing
control use indicate that many
employers are already utilizing some
combination of the required control
options. OSHA seeks additional
comments on its assumptions and other
control options for these workers. Based
on the discussion above, OSHA has
determined that there are no
technological hurdles to compliance
with this requirement in the proposed
rule.
B. Outdoor Workplaces
For outdoor workplaces, the primary
sources of exposure to heat hazards are
ambient heat and direct sunlight. Under
the proposed rule, OSHA is requiring
employers to provide a break area with
shade or air-conditioning.
I. Shade
As discussed in Section V., Risk
Assessment, access to shade can reduce
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71038
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the risk of HRI by decreasing exposure
to solar radiation and, in turn, reducing
overall heat load. Research has found
that total heat exchange is greater in
shaded conditions than sunny
conditions (Otani et al., 2021),
indicating that access to shaded areas
may reduce HRI. For outdoor workers
exposed to direct sunlight, a commonly
used engineering control is the use of a
shelter or canopy to provide a shaded
area for rest breaks. A wide variety of
portable pop-up canopies are
commercially available that can be
easily set up and moved around for
mobile work sites. Note that the
proposed rule would not allow mobile
equipment or machinery to be used to
provide shade for rest breaks due to the
potential safety hazards from
unintended or accidental start up and
movement of the equipment and the
potential for equipment to release
radiant heat.
Working or resting in the shade can
reduce the risk of HRI by decreasing
exposure to solar radiation and reducing
overall heat load. This control is
applicable to all outdoor industries and
is a key component of OSHA’s ‘‘Water.
Rest. Shade.’’ Heat Campaign guidance.
The feasibility of providing shade for
rest periods is demonstrated by OSHA
enforcement data. During inspections
conducted under the 2023 Heat National
Emphasis Program, OSHA Compliance
Officers completed a questionnaire
regarding work site conditions. Over
1,300 responses were received
indicating that 96% of employers
inspected provided access to cool
shaded areas (OSHA, 2023b). Several
States, including California, Oregon,
Colorado and Washington, have also
incorporated requirements to provide
shade into their heat-specific
standards.140 While the scope of
coverage varies by State, these standards
require employers to provide workers
with shade structures for rest breaks to
recover from the heat. In addition,
Maryland and Nevada proposed rules
that would also require employers to
provide access to shade.141
The addition of shaded break areas
has been demonstrated as an integral
part of a heat health plan to improve
worker performance in the agricultural
sector (Bodin et al., 2016; Morris et al.,
2020; Glaser et al., 2022). Bodin et al.
(2016) implemented a water, rest, and
shade campaign with 56 Salvadoran
sugarcane workers two months into the
harvest season. Workers were provided
a canopy for shaded breaks, insulated
water bladders, and fixed break times. A
qualitative study of the intervention
reported consistent use of the shaded
canopies and high worker satisfaction.
A similar study of sugar cane workers
conducted in 2022 indicated that
workers were provided with break
periods under adequate natural shade or
tents that were designed to be moved
easily to accompany the mobile
workforce throughout each day. Tents
were constructed from a netted fabric,
open on two sides to provide adequate
ventilation, and provided with stools for
seated, shaded rest (Glaser et al., 2022).
OSHA acknowledges that providing
stationary shading outdoors may be
difficult in some settings, particularly
where work crews are highly mobile,
such as in agricultural work. Even so,
several studies indicate the widespread
use of shade among agricultural
workers. Fleischer et al. (2013)
conducted a cross-sectional survey on
HRI symptoms and working conditions
in Georgia in 2011. Of the 405
farmworkers who completed the survey,
27% reported not having access to
shade, indicating that some form of
shade is available in the majority of
these work environments. A study by
Bethel et al. (2017) comparing
conditions for outdoor agricultural
workers in Oregon and Washington
found that workers in Oregon more
frequently reported the presence of
shade structures 142 and workers in
Washington more often reported access
to shade from trees.143 In Oregon,
workers more frequently reported using
shade structures and cars with airconditioning compared with workers in
Washington.144 However, the study was
subject to several limitations. First,
different methods of data collection
were used in Oregon and Washington,
which could have led to information
bias. Participants in Washington
completed a self-administered survey on
touchscreen tablets at the work site,
whereas participants in Oregon
completed a personal interview
administered by research staff at the
housing facility. Second, participants
were recruited differently in the two
States, via outreach workers in Oregon
and via employers and supervisors in
Washington. Next, the conditions in
which participants in the two States
worked were vastly different.
142 29%
140 (CA
8 CCR 3395; OR Admin. Code 437–002–
0156 and 437–004–1131; CO 7 CCR 1103–15:3; and
WA Admin. Code 296–62–09535).
141 Maryland COMAR 09.12.32; and Nevada
Proposed Regulation LCB File No. R053–20.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
use in Oregon vs. 5% in Washington.
in Washington vs. 47% in Oregon.
144 In Oregon, 26% of workers reported using
shade structures and 14% used cars with air
conditioning, compared to 3% and 6%
(respectively) in Washington.
143 92%
PO 00000
Frm 00342
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Specifically, participants in Washington
primarily picked tree fruit in orchard
settings, which provided a natural form
of shade, whereas participants in
Oregon primarily harvested blueberries
with little shade (Bethel et al., 2017).
The Fair Food Program is a
partnership between growers and
agriculture workers that includes safety
and health standards which require
participating employers to provide
shade, water, bathrooms, and rest
breaks. According to their 2021 report,
100% of Participating Growers have
purchased and distributed shade
structures to their crews, and they have
observed steady increases in the quality
of shade units at many growers’
operations, including custom designs
built to withstand field conditions. (Fair
Foods Standards Council, 2021)
During the SBREFA hearings, some
SERs with outdoor settings reported
using engineering controls such as
natural shade (e.g., trees and dense
vegetation), pop-up canopies, umbrellas,
and portable shades. Some SERs with
outdoor settings said they believed some
engineering controls including shade
and fans were infeasible for their
workplace. (Document ID 1081, p. 30).
II. Air-Conditioning for Outdoor
Workers
Access to air-conditioning for outdoor
work settings is primarily provided
through the use of vehicles, trailers, and
near-by buildings. OSHA understands
that the use of air-conditioning has
limited applications for outdoor
workplaces. However, evidence in the
docket indicates that it is feasible for a
variety of outdoor situations.
A 2018 study by Methner and
Eisenberg evaluated the risk of HRI for
employees engaged in strenuous work
in an extremely hot outdoor
environment, a park during summer
months. Worker tasks included
landscaping, demolition, and
bricklaying. Park policy included the
use of motor vehicles with airconditioning as a cool-down area for
breaks in remote locations where access
to cooled buildings was limited
(Methner and Eisenberg, 2018). As
mentioned above Bethel et al. (2017)
found that some workers in Oregon and
Washington have access to cars with airconditioning (14% vs. 3%).
The use of portable air-conditioning
units and vehicles with air-conditioning
for cooling is also supported by multiple
ANPRM commentors. In response to
OSHA’s request for information on
control options for outdoor work, the
City of Phoenix commented that
portable air-conditioning units are
available and have received positive
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
responses from employees. The
International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers (IBEW), AFL–CIO also
indicated that employees in the utilities
industry use a wide variety of cooling
methods including air-conditioning in
trucks or trailers.
During the SBREFA hearings, many
SERs with outdoor work settings
reported having air-conditioned
vehicles or trailers on site that workers
can use to cool down. When SERs were
polled at two sessions, September 12th
and 13th, on the types of engineering
controls that are used ‘‘to mitigate the
impact of heat exposure to employees
that work outdoors,’’ two-thirds (66.7%)
of the 30 responders reported using an
‘‘air-conditioned space.’’ (Document ID
1081, p. 30).
OSHA requests comments on
additional ways employers have utilized
air-conditioning for outdoor workers
and obstacles encountered, if any.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Preliminary Feasibility Finding for
Outdoor Workplaces
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that requirements for the use of
engineering controls for outdoor break
areas under the proposed standard are
technologically feasible for most
operations, most of the time.
Information obtained through the
SBREFA process, comments, and
research into existing control use
indicate that many employers are
already utilizing some form of shade or
air-conditioned space for employee
cooling. For those remaining employers,
OSHA anticipates they can quickly
come into compliance through the
implementation of shade or airconditioned vehicles, trailers and other
spaces, as described above. OSHA seeks
additional comments on its assumptions
and other control options for these
workers. Based on the discussion above,
OSHA has determined that there are no
technological hurdles to compliance
with this requirement.
C. Mobile Workplaces
Options for the use of engineering
controls for mobile work sites where the
work is not performed at a fixed
location are similar to other outdoor
work sites. Portable canopies can be
used to provide a shaded area for
breaks. Where electricity is available,
trailers with air-conditioning can be
used as cool-down areas for rest breaks.
Air-conditioned vehicle cabs can also be
used.
OSHA found several examples in
which employers agreed to provide
shade for outdoor workers as part of
contract negotiations around working
conditions. As previously mentioned,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the Teamsters submitted comments on
the ANPRM that included examples of
language from collective bargaining
agreements demonstrating steps
employers have taken to address
occupational HRIs. Language included
requirements for construction drivers,
employees suffering from heat illness
believing a preventative recovery period
is needed or feeling the need to protect
themselves from overheating, are
required to be provided access to an
area with shade that is either open to
the air or provided with ventilation for
a period of no less than five minutes
(Document ID 0707, p. 16).
I. Preliminary Feasibility Finding for
Mobile Workplaces
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that there are no technological hurdles
for the implementation of controls for
workers with mobile work sites. Based
on the discussion above, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that it is
technologically feasible, using
commercially available products and
technology, for employers with mobile
work sites to provide workers with
shaded or air-conditioned break areas.
OSHA seeks comment on this
determination and additional data and
information on other feasible control
options available for these mobile work
sites.
E. Preliminary Feasibility Findings
OSHA has reviewed the requirements
that would be imposed by the proposed
standard and has determined that
achieving compliance with the
proposed standard is technologically
feasible most of the time, in most of the
establishments and operations covered
by the standard. As discussed above, the
proposed rule is largely programmatic
and offers the employer several control
options. Under the proposed rule,
employers can determine the controls
best suited for their unique work
environment in order to comply with
the requirements for controls at break
areas and work areas. Not all practices,
procedures, or controls identified in this
technological feasibility analysis will be
necessary at all establishments: the
proposed standard provides flexibility
for employers to tailor their procedures,
practices, and controls to the needs of
their facility based on an assessment
specific to that facility. Moreover,
readily available and currently used
technology is capable of meeting these
requirements.
As part of this analysis, OSHA
reviewed the heat injury and illness
prevention practices currently in place
across the affected industries as well as
the recommended practices of industry
PO 00000
Frm 00343
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71039
trade associations and standards-setting
organizations. On the basis of current
compliance found by OSHA,
widespread familiarity with the
concepts and procedures contained in
the proposed rule, and the availability
of control options, OSHA has
determined the requirements of the
proposed rule are capable of being done
by most employers, most of the time and
therefore preliminarily determined that
compliance with the proposed rule is
technologically feasible.
F. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments on the
appropriateness of the preliminary
determinations contained in this
analysis.
Regarding the feasibility of
monitoring, OSHA seeks additional
comments and information regarding:
• The feasibility of measuring HI in
indoor environments and where heatgenerating processes occur.
• The use of WBGT including the
identification of situations in which
WBGT would or would not be practical
or pose challenges for employers to
measure.
Regarding the feasibility of controls,
OSHA seeks additional comments and
information on the following:
• Whether there are other controls or
technologies that may be available to
protect workers against heat hazards.
• The technological feasibility of
other engineering control options not
discussed here for indoor, outdoor, and
mobile work sites.
• The feasibility of dehumidification
as a control option for indoor
workplaces.
• Areas where employers have
determined that isolation of heat
producing equipment is not feasible and
alternatives employers have utilized to
reduce employee exposures.
• The current use of air-conditioning
in the industries covered under the
scope of the rulemaking.
• Additional ways employers have
utilized air-conditioning for outdoor
workers and obstacles encountered, if
any.
• The current use and application of
fans in both indoor and outdoor
settings.
• Work settings where the use of fans
is not feasible due to contamination
concerns and information on what
controls, including the use of airconditioning, employers use to prevent
HRIs in these settings.
• Indoor work settings without heatgenerating processes that may
experience temperatures above 102 °F
and information on what controls
employers implement when fan use is
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71040
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
contraindicated or when temperatures
exceed 102 °F.
X. Additional Requirements
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
OSHA reviewed this proposed rule
according to the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.) and Executive Order 12875
(58 FR 58093). Section 202 of the
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires agencies
to assess the anticipated costs and
benefits of a rule that includes a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
in any one year by State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of at least $100
million, adjusted annually for inflation.
In 2024, that threshold is $183 million.
Although OSHA may include
compliance costs for affected State Plan
governmental entities in its analysis of
the expected impacts associated with a
proposal, this proposed rule does not
place a mandate on State or local
government, for purposes of the UMRA.
See the discussion below in Section
X.H., Federalism.
The OSH Act does not cover Tribal
governments in the performance of
traditional governmental functions, but
it does cover Tribal governments when
they engage in activities of a commercial
or service character (see Menominee
Tribal Enters. v. Solis, 601 F.3d 669 (7th
Cir. 2010); Reich v. Mashantucket Sand
& Gravel, 95 F.3d 174, 180 (2nd Cir.
1996)). However, the cost of the
proposed rule for these covered
activities by a Tribal government would
not meet the threshold established in
the UMRA. As noted below, OSHA also
reviewed this rulemaking in accordance
with Executive Order 13175 on
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249 (November 9, 2000)) and
determined that it does not have ‘‘tribal
implications’’ as defined in that
Executive Order.
Based on the analysis presented in the
Preliminary Economic Analysis and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,
Section VIII. of this preamble, OSHA
concludes that the proposed rule would
impose a Federal mandate on the
private sector of $100 million or more
annually, adjusted for inflation. The
Preliminary Economic Analysis
constitutes the written statement
containing a qualitative and quantitative
assessment of the anticipated costs and
benefits required under section 202(a) of
the UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1532(a)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
B. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments/Executive
Order 13175
OSHA reviewed this proposed rule in
accordance with Executive Order 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, 65 FR
67249 (Nov. 6, 2000), and determined
that it does not have ‘‘tribal
implications’’ as defined in that order.
As explained above, the OSH Act does
not cover Tribal governments in the
performance of traditional governmental
functions, so except to the extent a tribe
is engaged in activities covered by this
proposed rule that would fall outside of
a traditional government function (i.e.,
activities of a commercial or service
character), the proposed rule would not
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian tribes in their sovereign
capacity, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes (see E.O.
13175 section 1(a)).
Section 5 of the Executive Order
requires agencies to consult with Tribal
officials early in the process of
developing regulations that: (1) have
Tribal implications, impose substantial
direct compliance costs on Indian
governments, and are not required by
statute; or (2) have Tribal implications
and preempt Tribal law (E.O. 13175
section 5(b), (c)). The Executive Order
requires that such consultation occur to
the extent practicable.
On May 15, 2024, OSHA held a
listening session with Tribal
representatives regarding this Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings rulemaking.
OSHA provided an overview of the
rulemaking effort and sought comment
on what, if any, Tribal implications
would result from the rulemaking. A
summary of the meeting and list of
attendees can be viewed in the docket
(DOL, 2024a).
C. Consultation With the Advisory
Committee on Construction Safety and
Health
Under 29 CFR parts 1911 and 1912,
OSHA must consult with the Advisory
Committee on Construction Safety and
Health (ACCSH), established pursuant
to section 107 of the Contract Work
Hours and Safety Standards Act (40
U.S.C. 3704), in setting standards for
construction work. Specifically, 29 CFR
1911.10(a) requires the Assistant
Secretary to provide ACCSH with any
proposal (along with pertinent factual
information) and give ACCSH an
opportunity to submit
PO 00000
Frm 00344
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
recommendations. See also 29 CFR
1912.3(a).
At a public meeting on April 24, 2024,
OSHA presented to ACCSH its
framework for a proposed rule for heat
injury and illness prevention in outdoor
and indoor work settings. The
Committee then passed unanimously a
motion recommending that OSHA
proceed expeditiously with proposing a
standard on heat injury and illness
prevention. The Committee also
recommended that OSHA consider the
feedback and questions discussed by
Committee members during the meeting
in formulating the proposed rule (see
the minutes from the meeting, Docket
No. 2024–0002). OSHA has considered
the Committee’s feedback in the
development of this proposal.
D. Environmental Impacts
OSHA reviewed the proposed rule
according to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the
regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR
chapter V, subchapter A), and the
Department of Labor’s NEPA procedures
(29 CFR part 11). Pursuant to 29 CFR
11.10 and consistent with CEQ
regulations, the promulgation,
modification, or revocation of any safety
standard is categorically excluded from
the requirement to prepare an
environmental assessment under NEPA
absent extraordinary circumstances
indicating the need for such an
assessment. OSHA finds that this
proposed rule presents no such
extraordinary circumstances.
E. Consensus Standards
OSHA must consider adopting
existing national consensus standards
that differ substantially from OSHA’s
proposed standard if the consensus
standard would better effectuate the
purposes of the Act (see 29 U.S.C.
655(b)(8); see also National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Pub. L. 104–113, section 12(d), 15
U.S.C. 272 Note). Whenever an OSHA
rule differs substantially from a national
consensus standard, OSHA must
publish in the Federal Register a
statement of the reasons why the rule
will better effectuate the purposes of the
Act than the national consensus
standard (29 U.S.C. 655(b)(8)). In the
development of the proposed rule,
OSHA reviewed the ANSI/ASSP
national consensus Standard for Heat
Stress Management in Construction and
Demolition Operations, A10.50–2024.
Many of the proposed provisions are
consistent with the ANSI/ASSP
standard, although there are some
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
differences in the details of the
provisions, particularly in the scope of
the standard, as well as requirements for
measurements, heat trigger levels,
hydration, rest breaks, medical
surveillance, PPE, recordkeeping, and a
qualified person.
Regarding the scope of the standard,
while the ANSI/ASSP standard applies
only to employers in construction and
demolition operations, the OSHA
proposed standard applies to all
employers in general industry,
construction, maritime, and agriculture,
with some exceptions (as discussed in
Section VII.A., Paragraph (a) Scope and
application, in Section VII., Explanation
of Proposed Requirements). While both
the ANSI/ASSP standard and the OSHA
proposed standard would require
employers to develop a written heat
stress management program and
acclimatization plan, the ANSI/ASSP
standard requires a competent person to
perform a heat stress task hazard
analysis and indicates that workers’ heat
exposure should be assessed by use of
the WBGT index or other heat stress
index that accounts for climatic and
metabolic heat sources and modification
of heat transfer from the worker by extra
clothing or PPE. The OSHA proposed
standard requires that employers
monitor heat conditions but allows
employers more flexibility to determine
workers’ heat exposure. For example, in
outdoor work areas, the OSHA proposed
standard allows employers to track local
heat index forecasts or measure heat
index or WBGT, while for indoor work
areas the OSHA proposed standard
requires the employer to identify work
areas with hazardous heat exposure and
develop and implement a monitoring
plan that includes measurement of heat
index or WBGT. For workplaces in
which employees where vaporimpermeable clothing, the employer’s
HIIPP must specify procedures to
protect employees while wearing vaporimpermeable clothing. OSHA is
allowing employers this additional
flexibility to determine workers’ heat
exposure through multiple options
based on feedback from public
commenters and small entity
representatives that WBGT can be
technically challenging to measure
accurately and that, for outdoor work
areas, weather forecasts are readily
available and easy to monitor (see
Section IX., Technological Feasibility).
In addition, with the exception of
Minnesota, none of the current or
proposed heat-specific State regulations
rely on WBGT.
With respect to the heat trigger levels
at which certain control measures are
specified, the ANSI/ASSP standard and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
OSHA proposed standard also deviate
slightly. While the ANSI/ASSP standard
sets an action level of WBGT adjusted
for clothing type (clothing-adjusted
WBGT) of 70 °F or heat index adjusted
for radiant heat (adjusted heat index) of
80 °F, the OSHA proposed standard
specifies an initial heat trigger of WBGT
equal to the NIOSH RAL or a heat index
(unadjusted) of 80 °F. The ANSI/ASSP
standard’s moderate hazard action level
is a clothing-adjusted WBGT of 80 °F or
an adjusted heat index of 95 °F, while
the OSHA proposed standard specifies a
high heat trigger of WBGT equal to
NISOH REL or a heat index (unadjusted)
of 90 °F. Additionally, the ANSI/ASSP
standard has an extreme hazard action
level of a clothing-adjusted WBGT of 87
°F or an adjusted heat index of 110 °F,
at which point ANSI/ASSP recommends
stopping work that requires high
strenuous workload. While the ANSI/
ASSP and OSHA initial and high heat
triggers are similar, OSHA is not
specifying a third trigger in its proposed
standard. This decision is in line with
recommendations from the SBAR Panel
to keep the heat triggers simple to
understand (see SBAR Panel findings
and recommendations, Section VIII.,
Preliminary Economic Analysis and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis).
Adding a third trigger could also add
considerable costs. As explained in
Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High
Heat Trigger, OSHA’s proposed triggers
are based on observational and
laboratory evidence and, the agency
believes, represent a highly sensitive
and appropriate screening threshold for
heat stress controls in the workplace.
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that these thresholds are protective for
workers and achievable for employers.
With regards to hydration, both the
ANSI/ASSP standard and the OSHA
proposed standard would require that
employees have access to suitably cool
water that is free of charge, in close
proximity to working areas, and of
sufficient quantity. The ANSI/ASSP
standard, however, additionally requires
that employees shall have access to
electrolyte replenishment beverages
when they are involved with heavy
work activities for greater than two
hours. The OSHA proposed standard
does not have this requirement, as the
agency heard from an ACCSH member
that electrolyte replenishment beverages
can contain sugar that cannot be
consumed by all workers. NIOSH, in its
hydration fact sheet, recognizes that
sports drinks with balanced electrolytes
can replace salt lost in sweat, but
similarly notes that heavy consumption
will add calories due to the added sugar.
PO 00000
Frm 00345
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71041
NIOSH also points out, ‘‘In general,
eating regular meals with adequate
water is sufficient to maintain water and
electrolyte balance’’ (NIOSH, 2017a). As
a result, the OSHA proposed rule does
not require employers to provide
electrolyte replenishment beverages but
OSHA notes in this preamble that
employers may provide electrolyte
replenishment beverages in addition to
water if they choose to do so (see
Section VII., Explanation of Proposed
Requirements). OSHA also requests
comment on whether the agency should
require the provision of electrolyte
supplements/solutions in addition to
water.
Another deviation between the ANSI/
ASSP standard and the OSHA proposed
standard exists in the requirement for
rest breaks. While both the ANSI/ASSP
standard and the OSHA proposed
standard require employers to provide
shaded rest and hydration break areas at
or above the action level or initial heat
trigger, respectively, the ANSI/ASSP
standard recommends, but does not
require, scheduled rest breaks at the
moderate hazard action level (a
clothing-adjusted WBGT or 80 °F or an
adjusted heat index of 95 °F). OSHA’s
proposed standard requires employers
to provide a rest break if needed to
prevent overheating at or above the
initial heat trigger, as well as a rest
break of at least 15 minutes every two
hours at or above the high heat trigger.
Rest breaks, particularly in combination
with water and shade, have been shown
in multiple scientific studies to reduce
the risk of heat-related fatality and HRI
(see Section V.C., Risk Reduction) and
therefore OSHA is requiring rest breaks
in the proposed standard.
Regarding medical surveillance, the
ANSI/ASSP standard indicates that a
medical surveillance program (e.g., a
comprehensive work and medical
history, a comprehensive physical
exam, an assessment of any personal
risk factors, and the ability to wear PPE)
should be established for all workers
covered by the standard, while the
OSHA proposed standard does not have
a medical surveillance requirement.
Similarly, while both the ANSI/ASSP
standard and the OSHA proposed
standard require that an employee
exhibiting signs or symptoms of heat
illness be monitored and not left alone
or sent home without being offered onsite first aid and, if necessary,
emergency medical services, the ANSI/
ASSP standard further requires that a
supervisor or team member be trained in
first aid and certified in
cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)
and the use of the automated external
defibrillator (AED) when a medical
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71042
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
professional is not available on-site. Due
to the widespread scope of the OSHA
proposed standard, the agency believes
that a requirement for medical
surveillance or for certification of
supervisors or team members in CPR
and AED would be impractical and
could add considerable costs. In
addition, OSHA also heard a comment
from a construction industry
representative during the ACCSH
consultation that requiring medical
surveillance would also be logistically
difficult (see the minutes from the
meeting, Docket No. 2024–0002).
With respect to PPE, the ANSI/ASSP
standard requires the implementation of
heat stress controls following the
hierarchy of controls, with engineering
controls implemented first, followed by
administrative controls, and then
cooling PPE. While the OSHA proposed
standard specifies the use of engineering
controls and administrative controls, it
does not require the use of cooling PPE.
OSHA believes that cooling PPE—such
as a cooling vest—has the potential to
become hazardous as the cooling
properties dissipate. As a result, the
OSHA proposed standard requires that
employers who choose to provide
cooling PPE to their employees ensure
that the cooling properties of the PPE
are maintained at all times during use
(see Section VII.E., Paragraph (e)
Requirements at or above the Initial
Heat Trigger).
With regards to recordkeeping, the
ANSI/ASSP standard requires
employers to keep a written inventory of
local conditions at the work site that
affect or increase the potential for heat
stress only as long as the hazard exists
or as required by law. The OSHA
proposed standard is more specific,
requiring that employers maintain
written or electronic records of indoor
work area measurements for 6 months
(see Section VII.I., Paragraph (i)
Recordkeeping). OSHA believes this
specificity increases clarity for
employers.
Finally, the ANSI/ASSP standard
requires a qualified person ‘‘who, by
possession of a recognized degree,
certificate, or professional standing, or
who by extensive knowledge, training,
and experience, has successfully
demonstrated the ability to solve or
resolve problems relating to the subject
matter, the work, or the project.’’ The
ANSI/ASSP standard requires that the
qualified person assist with the
development and review of the heat
stress management program, the use and
interpretation of the WBGT, and the
development and review of the first aid
and emergency action plan, as well as
providing guidance or in-person support
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
to the competent person on
implementation of the program as
needed. The OSHA proposed standard
does not have a requirement for a
qualified person. Due to the widespread
scope of the proposed standard, OSHA
does not believe that it would be
feasible to require all covered employers
to hire a qualified person as
contemplated by the ANSI/ASSP
standard. Instead, the proposed
standard requires the designation of one
or more heat safety coordinators who
are trained in and responsible for
ensuring compliance with all
requirements of the employer’s HIIPP.
OSHA also plans to provide compliance
assistance materials such as a model
HIIPP and other materials.
OSHA also notes that there are some
requirements in its proposed standard
that are not required by the ANSI/ASSP
standard. Specifically, the OSHA
proposed standard contains a hazard
alert provision that requires employers
to notify employees that the high heat
trigger has been met or exceeded (see
Section VII.F., Paragraph (f)
Requirements at or above the High Heat
Trigger). The OSHA proposed standard
also requires that employers place
warning signs at indoor areas with
ambient temperatures that regularly
exceed 120°F (see Section VII.F.,
Paragraph (f) Requirements at or above
the High Heat Trigger). OSHA believes
that these additional requirements are
important for the protection of workers
from heat hazards in the workplace.
OSHA has preliminarily determined
that the proposed standard would be
highly effective at addressing the risk of
occupational heat exposure while
remaining workable across the many
different work contexts covered by the
proposal. As such, OSHA believes that
the standard as proposed will best
effectuate the OSH Act’s purpose of
ensuring safe and healthful working
conditions.
F. Incorporation by Reference
OSHA is proposing to incorporate by
reference NIOSH Publication No. 2016–
106. Criteria for a Recommended
Standard: Occupational Exposure to
Heat and Hot Environments, February
2016. In this publication, NIOSH
provides recommendations for an
occupational standard for workers
exposed to heat, including the NIOSH
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL) and
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL).
OSHA is proposing the RAL as an
option for the initial heat trigger and the
REL as an option for the high heat
trigger (see Section VII.B., Paragraph (b)
Definitions).
PO 00000
Frm 00346
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
NIOSH Publication No. 2016–106 is
available to download for free on
NIOSH’s website (https://www.cdc.gov/
niosh/docs/2016-106) and linked from
OSHA’s website (https://www.osha.gov/
heat-exposure/standards). It is also
available in the rulemaking docket for
this proposed standard (Docket ID
OSHA–2021–0009–0050).
G. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks
Executive Order 13045, on Protection
of Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks, as amended by
Executive Orders 13229 and 13296,
requires that Federal agencies provide
additional evaluation of economically
significant regulatory actions that
concern an environmental health or
safety risk that an agency has reason to
believe may disproportionately affect
children. This proposed rule is intended
to protect United States workers from
occupational hazards. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that the
proposed rule will not
disproportionately affect children or
have any adverse impact on children.
Because workers in the industries
covered by this proposed rule may
include older children, the proposed
rule could have a protective effect on
these older children in the workforce by
reducing the possibility of heat-related
injury or illness. Accordingly, E.O.
13045, Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks, requires no further agency action
or analysis.
H. Federalism
The agency reviewed this proposed
rule in accordance with Executive Order
13132 on Federalism (64 FR 43255,
(August 10, 1999)), which, among other
things, is intended to ‘‘ensure that the
principles of federalism established by
the Framers guide the executive
departments and agencies in the
formulation and implementation of
policies.’’ The E.O. generally allows
Federal agencies to preempt State law
only as provided by Congress or where
State law conflicts with Federal law. In
such cases, Federal agencies must limit
preemption of State law to the extent
possible. The E.O. also requires that
agencies consult with States on rules
that have ‘‘federalism implications,’’
which are those that have ‘‘substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
This proposed rule complies with
E.O. 13132. The hazards addressed by
this proposed rule and its goal of
protecting workers from exposure to
hazardous heat are national in scope
and the proposed rule does not include
‘‘federalism implications’’ as defined in
the E.O. Under section 18 of the OSH
Act (29 U.S.C. 667), Congress expressly
provided that States may adopt, with
Federal approval, a plan for the
development and enforcement of
occupational safety and health
standards. OSHA refers to the
occupational safety and health plans
that have been submitted by States and
approved by OSHA as ‘‘State Plans.’’
Occupational safety and health
standards developed by States with
OSHA-approved State Plans must be at
least as effective in providing safe and
healthful employment and places of
employment as the Federal standards.
Subject to these requirements, these
States are free to develop and enforce
their own occupational safety and
health standards. The choice to adopt a
State Plan is part of the statutory
scheme and is not mandatory, so there
are no federalism implications for States
that choose to do so.
In States without OSHA-approved
State Plans, the States are not employers
under to the OSH Act and the proposed
rule would therefore not have a
substantial direct effect on them (29
U.S.C. 652(5)). The following section
addresses the effect of the proposed rule
on States with OSHA-approved State
Plans.
I. Requirements for States With OSHAApproved State Plans
When Federal OSHA promulgates a
new standard or a more stringent
amendment to an existing standard,
States and U.S. Territories with OSHAapproved State Plans must either amend
their standards to be identical to or ‘‘at
least as effective as’’ the new standard
or amendment or show that an existing
State Plan standard covering this area is
already ‘‘at least as effective’’ as the new
Federal standard or amendment (29 CFR
1953.5(b)). State Plan adoption must be
completed within six months of the
promulgation date of the final Federal
rule.
Of the 29 States and Territories with
OSHA-approved State Plans, 22 cover
both public and private-sector
employees: Alaska, Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota,
Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina,
Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, and Wyoming. The
remaining seven States and Territories
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
cover only State and local government
employees: Connecticut, Illinois, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York,
and the Virgin Islands.
OSHA preliminarily concludes that
this proposed rule would increase
protections beyond those provided by
most current standards in State Plans.
Therefore, within six months of any
final rule’s promulgation date, States
with OSHA-approved State Plans would
be required to adopt standards that are
identical to or ‘‘at least as effective’’ as
this rule, unless they demonstrate that
such amendments are not necessary
because their existing permanent
standards are already ‘‘at least as
effective’’ in protecting workers. OSHA
seeks comment on this assessment of its
proposal.
J. OMB Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
A. Overview
The proposed Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Standard contains
collection-of -information requirements
that are subject to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review
and approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. and its implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. The PRA
defines a collection-of-information as
the obtaining, causing to be obtained,
soliciting, or requiring the disclosure to
third parties or the public of facts or
opinions by or for an agency regardless
of form or format. (See 44 U.S.C.
3502(3)(A)). The collection of
information requirements specified in
the proposal would reduce the risk of
death, serious injury, and illness by
ensuring that employers develop and
implement a worksite heat injury and
illness prevention plan (HIIPP), review
and evaluate the effectiveness of the
HIIPP, designate one or more heat safety
coordinators to implement and monitor
the HIIPP, and develop and implement
a heat illness emergency response plan
to respond to employees experiencing
signs and symptoms of heat related
illnesses for indoor and outdoor
conditions. OSHA is requesting OMB
approval of the proposed Information
Collection Request (ICR) and a new
OMB Control Number for this ICR
currently under OMB Control Number
1218–0NEW.
Under the PRA, a Federal agency
cannot conduct or sponsor a collection
of information unless OMB approves it,
and the agency displays a currently
valid OMB control number (44 U.S.C.
3507). Also, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no employer shall be
subject to penalty for failing to comply
PO 00000
Frm 00347
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71043
with a collection of information if the
collection of information does not
display a currently valid OMB control
number (44 U.S.C. 3512).
B. Solicitation of Comments
In accordance with the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2) and 3507(d)), OSHA
submitted the collection-of-information
requirements identified in the NPRM to
OMB for review. The agency solicits
comments on the collection-ofinformation requirements and estimated
burden hours associated with these
requirements, including comments on
the following items:
• Whether the proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper
performance of the agency’s functions,
including whether the information is
useful;
• The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of
the burden (time and cost) of the
proposed collections of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• The quality, utility, and clarity of
the information collected; and
• Ways to minimize the compliance
burden on employers, for example, by
using automated or other technological
techniques for collecting and
transmitting information (78 FR 56438).
C. Proposed Collection of Information
Requirements
As required by 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv)
and 1320.8(d)(1), the following
paragraphs provide information about
this ICR.
1. Title: Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Standard (29 CFR 1910.148).
2. Description of the ICR: The
proposal would add new collection-ofinformation requirements to protect
indoor and outdoor workers from
hazardous heat.
3. Brief Summary of the Collection of
Information Requirements: The
proposed Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Standard ICR adds new
collection-of-information requirements
that would ensure that employers
develop and implement a worksite heat
injury and illness prevention plan,
review and evaluate the effectiveness of
the HIIPP, designate one or more heat
safety coordinators to implement and
monitor the HIIPP, and develop and
implement a heat illness emergency
response plan for employees
experiencing signs and symptoms of
heat related illnesses for indoor and
outdoor workers. Specifically, the
proposed collection-of-information
requirements contained in the proposed
rule for the Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Standard are listed in table
X.J–1.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
71044
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE X.J–1—PROPOSED COLLECTION-OF-INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR HEAT INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Section
Collection-of-information requirements
1
§ 1910.148(c)(1) through
(4).
2
§ 1910.148(c)(5) ................
3
§ 1910.148(c)(6) and (7) ....
4
§ 1910.148(c)(8) and (9) ....
5
§ 1910.148(d)(3) ................
6
§ 1910.148(e)(7) ................
7
§ 1910.148(e)(9) ................
8
§ 1910.148(f)(4) .................
9
§ 1910.148(f)(5) .................
10
§ 1910.148(g)(1) ................
11
§ 1910.148(g)(3) ................
12
§ 1910.148(i)(1) .................
Paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) would require employers to develop and implement a heat injury and illness
prevention plan (HIIPP), which must include a list of covered activities, the policies and procedures necessary to comply with the proposed standard, the heat metric the employer will use to comply with paragraph (d), and policies and procedures related to the use of vapor-impermeable clothing, if applicable. For
employers with more than 10 employees, the HIIPP must be in writing.
Paragraph (c)(5) would require the employer to designate one or more heat safety coordinators to implement
and monitor the HIIPP.
Paragraphs (c)(6) and (7) would require the employer to seek the input and involvement of non-managerial
employees in the development and implementation of the HIIPP, and to review and evaluate the effectiveness of the HIIPP at least annually and whenever a heat-related illness or injury occurs that results in days
away from work, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.
Paragraphs (c)(8) and (9) would require the employer to make the HIIPP readily available at the work site in
a language each employee, supervisor, and heat safety coordinator understands.
Paragraph (d)(3) would require the employer, at indoor work sites, to identify each work area(s) where there
is a reasonable expectation that employees are or may be exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger. For each work area identified, the employer would be required to develop and implement a monitoring
plan that includes measuring heat index or wet bulb globe temperature. Employers would also be required
to evaluate any affected work area(s) and update their monitoring plan whenever there is a change in production, processes, equipment, controls, or a substantial increase in outdoor temperature which has the
potential to increase heat exposure indoors. The employer would be required to seek the input and involvement of non-managerial employees when identifying work areas with a reasonable expectation of exposure at or above the initial heat trigger and in developing and updating monitoring plans.
Paragraph (e)(7) would require the employer, when the initial heat trigger is met or exceeded, to implement
an acclimatization protocol for each new employee and each returning employee (i.e., who has been away
from work for more than 14 days) during their first week on the job. Employers would be required to
choose either a plan that would incorporate the control measures required when the high heat trigger is
met or exceeded, or a gradual acclimatization plan that would slowly increase the employee’s exposure to
heat each day. The requirement would not apply if the employer can demonstrate that the employee consistently worked under the same or similar conditions within the past 14 days.
Paragraph (e)(9) would require the employer, when the initial heat trigger is met or exceeded, to maintain a
means of effective, two-way communication with employees and regularly communicate with employees.
Paragraph (f)(4) would require the employer, prior to the work shift or upon determining that the high heat
trigger is met or exceeded, to notify employees of the importance of drinking plenty of water, employees’
right to take rest breaks if needed and required rest breaks, how to seek help and the procedures to take
in a heat emergency, and, for mobile work sites, the location of break area(s) and drinking water.
Paragraph (f)(5) would require the employer to place a legible, visible, and understandable warning sign at
indoor work areas with ambient temperatures that regularly exceed 120 °F.
Paragraph (g)(1) would require employers, as part of their HIIPP, to develop and implement a heat emergency response plan that includes a list of emergency phone numbers, a description of how employees
can contact a supervisor and emergency medical services, individual(s) designated to ensure that heat
emergency procedures are invoked when appropriate, a description of how to transport employees to a
place where they can be reached by emergency medical services, clear and precise directions to the work
site, and procedures for responding to an employee experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related illness or a heat emergency.
Paragraph (g)(3) would require the employer, if an employee is experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency, to take immediate actions to reduce the employee’s body temperature and immediately contact emergency medical services, as well as relieving them from duty, monitoring them, ensuring they are
not left alone, and offering them on-site first aid and medical services.
Paragraph (i)(1) would require employers to have written or electronic records of on-site measurements at indoor work areas, and to retain those records for 6 months.
4. OMB Control Number: 1218–
0NEW.
5. Affected Public: Business or other
for-profit.
6. Number of Respondents: 2,535,775.
7. Frequency of Responses: On
occasion, annually.
8. Number of Responses:
1,699,783,434.
9. Average Time per Response: Varies.
10. Estimated Total Burden Hours:
27,803,599.
11. Estimated Costs (capital-operation
and maintenance): $24,040,064.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
D. Submitting Comments
Members of the public may comment
on the collection of information
requirements in this proposed standard
by sending their comments to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the
Department of Labor, OSHA Regulation
Identifier Number (RIN) (1218–AD39),
by email: OIRA_submission@
omb.eop.gov. Please limit the comments
to only those addressing the collection
of information requirements in the
proposed Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention standard (i.e., proposed
§ 1910.148). OSHA encourages
PO 00000
Frm 00348
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
commenters also to submit their
comments on these collection of
information requirements to the
rulemaking docket (OSHA–2021–0009),
along with their comments on other
parts of the proposed standard. For
instructions on submitting these
comments to the docket, see the sections
of this Federal Register document titled
DATES and ADDRESSES. Comments
submitted in response to this document
are public records; therefore, OSHA
cautions commenters about submitting
personal information, such as Social
Security numbers and dates of birth.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
E. Docket and Inquiries
To access the docket to read or
download comments and other
materials related to this paperwork
determination, including the complete
ICR, use the procedures described under
the section of this document titled
ADDRESSES. You may obtain an
electronic copy of the complete ICR by
going to the website at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain,
then select ‘‘Department of Labor’’
under ‘‘Currently Under Review‘‘, then
click on ‘‘submit’’. This will show all of
the Department’s ICRs currently under
review, including the ICRs submitted for
proposed rulemakings. To make
inquiries, or to request other
information, contact Ms. Seleda
Perryman, Directorate of Standards and
Guidance, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department
of Labor; telephone (202) 693–4131;
email perryman.seleda.m@dol.gov.
XI. Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under
the direction of Douglas L. Parker,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20210. It is
issued under the authority of sections 4,
6, and 8 of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653,655,
and 657); 5 U.S.C. 553, Secretary of
Labor’s Order No. 8–2020 (85 FR
58383), and 29 CFR part 1911.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
References
Adam-Poupart, A., Smargiassi, A., Busque,
M.-A., Duguay, P., Fournier, M., Zayed,
J., & Labrèche, F. (2015). Effect of
summer outdoor temperatures on workrelated injuries in Quebec (Canada).
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 72(5), 338–345. https://
doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2014-102428.
Adams, S. J., Heywood, J. S., & Rothstein, R.
(2009). Teachers, Performance Pay, and
Accountability: What education should
learn from other sectors.
Adhvaryu, A., Kala, N., & Nyshadham, A.
(2020). The Light and the Heat:
Productivity Co-Benefits of EnergySaving Technology. The Review of
Economics and Statistics, 102(4), 779–
792. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_
00886.
Alele, F. O., Malau-Aduli, B. S., MalauAduli, A. E. O., & J. Crowe, M. (2020).
Epidemiology of Exertional Heat Illness
in the Military: A Systematic Review of
Observational Studies. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 17(19), 7037. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197037.
Allan, J.R., & Gibson, T.M. (1979). Separation
of the Effects of Raised Skin and Core
Temperature on Performance of a Pursuit
Rotor Task. Aviation, Space, and
Environmental Medicine, 678–682.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Alsharif, M. (2023, July 21). Construction
worker accused of being on drugs died of
heatstroke while working in hot Texas
sun, lawsuit says. https://
www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/
construction-worker-accused-drugs-diedheatstroke-working-hot-texas-surcna95565.
Amazon.com, Inc. (2024a). Dehumidifiers for
Room: 41 oz 3300 Cubic Feet.
Amazon.com.
Amazon.com, Inc. (2024b). Utopia Bedding
Flat Sheet—Soft Brushed Microfiber
Fabric. Amazon.com.
Amazon.com, Inc. (2024c). Yaheetech 12x12
Pop Up Canopy Easy Set-up Tent.
Amazon.com.
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). (2017).
Heat Stress and Strain. In 2017 TLVs and
BEIs: Based on the documentation of the
threshold limit values for chemical
substances and physical agents &
biological exposure indices. American
Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists. https://www.acgih.org/forms/
store/ProductFormPublic/2017-tlvs-andbeis.
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). (2021).
Heat Stress and Strain Notice of
Intended Change for TLV. American
Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists.
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). (2023).
2023 TLVs and BEIs: Based on the
documentation of the threshold limit
values for chemical substances and
physical agents & biological exposure
indices. American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists.
American Samoa Department of Commerce.
(2023). American Samoa Statistical
Yearbook 2021. https://www.doc.as.gov/
post/news-release-american-samoastatistical-yearbook-2021.
Anderson, G.B., Bell, M., & Peng, R.D. (2013).
Methods to Calculate the Heat Index as
an Exposure Metric in Environmental
Health Research. Environmental Health
Perspectives, 121(10), Article 10. https://
doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1206273.
Anderson, R., & De Souza, E. (2017). Heat
stress management in underground
mines. International Journal of Mining
Science and Technology, 27(4), Article 4.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.
2017.05.020.
ANSI/ASSP. (2024). A10.50–2024 Standard
for Heat Stress Management in
Construction and Demolition
Operations. https://store.assp.org/
PersonifyEbusiness/Store/ProductDetails/productId/260687328.
Arbury, S., Jacklitsch, B., Farquah, O.,
Hodgson, M., Lamson, G., Martin, H., &
Profitt, A. (2014). Heat Illness and Death
Among Workers—United States, 2012–
2013. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report (MMWR), 63(31), 661–665.
Arbury, S., Lindsley, M., & Hodgson, M.
(2016). A Critical Review of OSHA Heat
Enforcement Cases: Lessons Learned.
Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 58(4), 359–363.
PO 00000
Frm 00349
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71045
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.
0000000000000640.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Board
(AFHSB). (2017). Rhabdomyolysis;
Exertional. AFHSB Surveillance Case
Definitions.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center.
(2013). Update: Exertional
rhabdomyolysis, active component, U.S.
Armed Forces, 2008–2012. Medical
Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),
20(3), 21–24.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center.
(2018). Update: Exertional
rhabdomyolysis, active component, U.S.
armed forces, 2013–2017. Medical
Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),
25(4), 13–17.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2020). Update: Exertional hyponatremia,
active component, U.S. Armed Forces,
2004–2019. Medical Surveillance
Monthly Report (MSMR), 27(4), 15–19.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2021). Update: Exertional hyponatremia,
active component, U.S. Armed Forces,
2005–2020. Medical Surveillance
Monthly Report (MSMR), 28(4), 21–26.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2022a). Update: Exertional
hyponatremia, active component, U.S.
Armed Forces, 2006–2021. Medical
Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),
29(4), 21–26.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2022b). Update: Heat illness, active
component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2021.
Medical Surveillance Monthly Report
(MSMR), 29(4), 8–14.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2023a). Exertional hyponatremia among
active component members of the U.S.
Armed Forces, 2007–2022. Medical
Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),
30(4), 13–17.
Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division.
(2023b). Update: Exertional
rhabdomyolysis, active component, U.S.
armed forces, 2018–2022. Medical
Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),
30(4), 8–12.
Armstrong, L.E. (1989). Heat Exhaustion. U.S.
Army Research Institute of
Environmental Medicine.
Armstrong, L.E., Casa, D.J., Millard-Stafford,
M., Moran, D.S., Pyne, S.W., & Roberts,
W.O. (2007). Exertional Heat Illness
during Training and Competition.
American College of Sports Medicine
Position Stand. Medicine & Science in
Sports & Exercise, 39(3), 556–572.
https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0b013e31802fa199.
Armstrong, L.E., De Luca, J.P., & Hubbard, R.
(1989). Time course of recovery and heat
acclimation ability of prior heatstroke
patients. Symposium: Exertional
Heatstroke: An International Perspective.
Annual meeting of the American College
of Sports Medicine. Heat Research
Division, U.S. Army Research Institute of
Environmental Medicine.
Arnold, T.J., Arcury, T.A., Sandberg, J.C.,
Quandt, S.A., Talton, J.W., Mora, D.C.,
Kearney, G.D., Chen, H., Wiggins, M.F.,
& Daniel, S.S. (2020). Heat-Related
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71046
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Illness Among Latinx Child Farmworkers
in North Carolina: A Mixed-Methods
Study. NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of
Environmental and Occupational Health
Policy, 30(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1048291120920571.
Ashenfelter, O.C., Farber, H., & Ransom, M.R.
(2010). Labor Market Monopsony.
Journal of Labor Economics, 28(2), 203–
210. https://doi.org/10.1086/653654.
Ashford, N. (2007). Workers’ Compensation.
In Environmental and Occupational
Medicine (4th ed., pp. 1712–1719).
Lippincott-Raven.
Ashford, N.A., Ayers, C., & Stone, R.F.
(1985). Using Regulation to Change the
Market for Innovation. Harvard
Environmental Law Review, 9(2), 419–
466.
Ashford, N., & Caldart, C. (1996). Technology,
Law, and the Working Environment
(Revised). Island Press.
Asplund, C.A., O’Connor, F.G., & Noakes,
T.D. (2011). Exercise-associated collapse:
An evidence-based review and primer
for clinicians. British Journal of Sports
Medicine, 45(14), 1157–1162. https://
doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2011-090378.
ASTM International. (2021). Standard Guide
for Managing Heat Stress and Heat
Strain in Foundries.
Astrand, I. (1960). Aerobic work capacity in
men and women with special reference
to age. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica.
Supplementum, 49(169), 1–92.
Atan, L., Andreoni, C., Ortiz, V., Silva, E.K.,
Pitta, R., Atan, F., & Srougi, M. (2005).
High kidney stone risk in men working
in steel industry at hot temperatures.
Urology, 65(5), 858–861. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.urology.2004.11.048.
Atlantic Council. (2021). Extreme Heat: The
Economic and Social Consequences for
the United States. Atlantic Council.
Atlantic Council. (2022). Methodology for
Extreme Heat: The Economic and Social
Consequences for Global Cities. Atlantic
Council.
Auffhammer, M. (2018). Quantifying
Economic Damages from Climate
Change. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 32(4), 33–52. https://
doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.4.33.
Ballester, J., Quijal-Zamorano, M., Méndez
Turrubiates, R.F., Pegenaute, F.,
Herrmann, F.R., Robine, J.M., Basagaña,
X., Tonne, C., Antó, J.M., & Achebak, H.
(2023). Heat-related mortality in Europe
during the summer of 2022. Nature
Medicine, 29(7), 1857–1866. https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02419-z.
Barbic, F., Casazza, G., Zamunér, A.R.,
Costantino, G., Orlandi, M., Dipaola, F.,
Capitanio, C., Achenza, S., Sheldon, R.,
& Furlan, R. (2014). Driving and Working
with Syncope. Autonomic Neuroscience:
Basic & Clinical, 184, 46–52. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autneu.2014.05.006.
Barbic, F., Dipaola, F., Casazza, G., Borella,
M., Minonzio, M., Solbiati, M., Raj, S.,
Sheldon, R., Quinn, J., Costantino, G., &
Furlan, R. (2019). Syncope in a WorkingAge Population: Recurrence Risk and
Related Risk Factors. Journal of Clinical
Medicine, 8(2), 150. https://doi.org/
10.3390/jcm8020150.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Bar-Or, O., Lundegren, H.M., & Buskirk, E.R.
(1969). Heat tolerance of exercising obese
and lean women. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 26(4), 403–409. https://
doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1969.26.4.403.
Barrow, M.W., & Clark, K.A. (1998). Heatrelated illnesses. American Family
Physician, 58(3), 749–756, 759.
Barthwal, V., Jain, S., Babuta, A., Jamir, C.,
Sharma, A.K., & Mohan, A. (2022).
Health impact assessment of Delhi’s
outdoor workers exposed to air pollution
and extreme weather events: An
integrated epidemiology approach.
Environmental Science and Pollution
Research, 29(29), 44746–44758. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18886-9.
Barwood, M.J., Davey, S., House, J.R., &
Tipton, M.J. (2009). Post-exercise cooling
techniques in hot, humid conditions.
European Journal of Applied Physiology,
107(4), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00421-009-1135-1.
Basu, R., Rau, R., Pearson, D., & Malig, B.
(2018). Temperature and Term Low Birth
Weight in California. American Journal
of Epidemiology, 187(11), 2306–2314.
https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwy116.
Basu, R., & Samet, J.M. (2002). Relation
between Elevated Ambient Temperature
and Mortality: A Review of the
Epidemiologic Evidence. Epidemiologic
Reviews, 24(2), 190–202. https://doi.org/
10.1093/epirev/mxf007.
Bates, G.P., & Miller, V.S. (2008). Sweat rate
and sodium loss during work in the heat.
Journal of Occupational Medicine and
Toxicology, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/
10.1186/1745-6673-3-4.
Bedno, S.A., Urban, N., Boivin, M.R., &
Cowan, D.N. (2014). Fitness, obesity and
risk of heat illness among army trainees.
Occupational Medicine, 64(6), 461–467.
https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqu062.
Behrer, A.P., & Park, J. (2017). Will We
Adapt? Temperature, Labor and
Adaptation to Climate Change [Working
paper].
Behrer, A.P., Park, R.J., Wagner, G., Golja,
C.M., & Keith, D.W. (2021). Heat has
larger impacts on labor in poorer areas.
Environmental Research
Communications, 3(9), 095001. https://
doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/abffa3.
Bell, N.S., Amoroso, P.J., Senier, L.,
Williams, J.O., & Yore, M.M. (2004). The
Total Army Injury and Health Outcomes
Database (TAIHOD): Uses and
Limitations as a Research Tool for Force
Health Protection Research. U.S. Army
Research Institute of Environmental
Medicine. USARIEM TECHNICAL NOTE
TN05–01.
Belval, L.N., Casa, D.J., Adams, W.M.,
Chiampas, G.T., Holschen, J.C.,
Hosokawa, Y., Jardine, J., Kane, S.F.,
Labotz, M., Lemieux, R.S., McClaine,
K.B., Nye, N.S., O’Connor, F.G., Prine,
B., Raukar, N.P., Smith, M.S., & Stearns,
R.L. (2018). Consensus Statement—
Prehospital Care of Exertional Heat
Stroke. Prehospital Emergency Care,
22(3), 392–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10903127.2017.1392666.
Bendak, S., Jouaret, R., & Rashid, H. (2022).
Effects of high ambient temperature on
PO 00000
Frm 00350
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
construction workers performance: A
longitudinal empirical study. Journal of
Safety Research, 81, 197–202. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2022.02.011.
Bergeron, M.F. (2003). Heat cramps: Fluid
and electrolyte challenges during tennis
in the heat. Journal of Science and
Medicine in Sport, 6(1), 19–27.
Bergeron, M.F. (2007). Exertional Heat
Cramps: Recovery and Return to Play.
Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 16(3),
190–196. https://doi.org/10.1123/
jsr.16.3.190.
Bergeron, M.F. (2008). Muscle Cramps during
Exercise—Is It Fatigue or Electrolyte
Deficit? Current Sports Medicine
Reports, 7(4), S50–S55.
Berko, J., Ingram, D., Saha, S., & Parker, J.
(2014). Deaths Attributed to Heat, Cold,
and Other Weather Events in the United
States, 2006–2010. National Health
Statistics Reports, 76.
Bernard, T.E., Ashley, C.D., Garzon, X.P.,
Kim, J.-H., & Coca, A. (2017). Prediction
of WBGT-based clothing adjustment
values from evaporative resistance.
Industrial Health, 55(6), 549–554.
https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.20170121.
Bernard, T.E., & Iheanacho, I. (2015). Heat
Index and Adjusted Temperature as
Surrogates for Wet Bulb Globe
Temperature to Screen for Occupational
Heat Stress. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 12(5), 323–333.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2014.
989365.
Bethel, J., & Harger, R. (2014). Heat-Related
Illness among Oregon Farmworkers.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 11(9), 9273–
9285. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph110909273.
Bethel, J.W., Spector, J.T., & Krenz, J. (2017).
Hydration and Cooling Practices Among
Farmworkers in Oregon and Washington.
Journal of Agromedicine, 22(3), Article 3.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2017.
1318100.
Better, O.S., Shabtai, M., Kedar, S., Melamud,
A., Berenheim, J., & Chaimovitz, C.
(1980). Increased Incidence of
Nephrolithiasis (N) in Lifeguards (LG) in
Israel. In S.G. Massry, E. Ritz, & H. Jahn
(Eds.), Phosphate and Minerals in Health
and Disease (Vol. 128, pp. 467–472).
Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-1-4615-9167-2_51.
Billikopf, G.E., & Norton, M. (1992). Pay
method affects vineyard pruner
performance. California Agriculture,
46(5), 12–13. https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.
v046n05p12.
Binkley, H.M., Beckett, J., Casa, D.J., Kleiner,
D.M., & Plummer, P.E. (2002). National
Athletic Trainers’ Association Position
Statement: Exertional Heat Illnesses.
Journal of Athletic Training, 37(3), 329–
343.
Boal, W.M., & Ransom, M.R. (1997).
Monopsony in the Labor Market. Journal
of Economic Literature, 35(1), 86–112.
Boden, L.I., & Ozonoff, A. (2008). CaptureRecapture Estimates of Nonfatal
Workplace Injuries and Illnesses. Annals
of Epidemiology, 18(6), 500–506. https://
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.
2007.11.003.
Bodin, T., Garcı́a-Trabanino, R., Weiss, I.,
Jarquı́n, E., Glaser, J., Jakobsson, K.,
Lucas, R.A.I., Wesseling, C., Hogstedt, C.,
& Wegman, D.H. (2016). Intervention to
reduce heat stress and improve
efficiency among sugarcane workers in
El Salvador: Phase 1. Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 73(6), 409–416.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016103555.
Boersma, P., Black, L.I., & Ward, B.W. (2020).
Prevalence of Multiple Chronic
Conditions Among US Adults, 2018.
Preventing Chronic Disease, 17. https://
doi.org/10.5888/pcd17.200130.
Bonauto, D., Anderson, R., Rauser, E., &
Burke, B. (2007). Occupational heat
illness in Washington State, 1995–2005.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
50(12), 940–950. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ajim.20517.
Bonauto, D., Fan, J., Largo, T., Rosenman, K.,
Green, M., Walters, J., Materna, B.,
Flattery, J., St. Louis, T., Yu, L., Fang, S.,
Davis, L., Valiante, D., Cummings, K.,
Hellsten, J., & Prosperie, S. (2010).
Proportion of workers who were workinjured and payment by workers’
compensation systems—10 states, 2007.
MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 59(29), 897–900.
Bonauto, D., & Spector, J. (2024).
Communication with David Bonauto and
June Spector on June 17, 2024.
Bonde, J.P. (1992). Semen quality in welders
exposed to radiant heat. British Journal
of Industrial Medicine, 49, 5–10.
Bonell, A., Sonko, B., Badjie, J., Samateh, T.,
Saidy, T., Sosseh, F., Sallah, Y., Bajo, K.,
Murray, K.A., Hirst, J., Vicedo-Cabrera,
A., Prentice, A.M., Maxwell, N.S., &
Haines, A. (2022). Environmental heat
stress on maternal physiology and fetal
blood flow in pregnant subsistence
farmers in The Gambia, west Africa: An
observational cohort study. The Lancet
Planetary Health, 6(12), e968–e976.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S25425196(22)00242-X.
Boonruksa, P., Maturachon, T., Kongtip, P., &
Woskie, S. (2020). Heat Stress,
Physiological Response, and HeatRelated Symptoms among Thai
Sugarcane Workers. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 17(17), 6363. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176363.
Borg, M.A., Xiang, J., Anikeeva, O.,
Pisaniello, D., Hansen, A., Zander, K.,
Dear, K., Sim, M.R., & Bi, P. (2021).
Occupational heat stress and economic
burden: A review of global evidence.
Environmental Research, 195, 110781.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.
2021.110781.
Borghi, L., Meschi, T., Amato, F., Novarini,
A., Romanelli, A., & Cigala, F. (1993).
Hot Occupation and Nephrolithiasis. The
Journal of Urology, 150, 1757–1760.
Borjas, G. (2000). Labor Economics (2nd ed.).
Irwin McGraw-Hill.
Bouchama, A., Abuyassin, B., Lehe, C.,
Laitano, O., Jay, O., O’Connor, F.G., &
Leon, L.R. (2022). Classic and exertional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
heatstroke. Nature Reviews Disease
Primers, 8(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41572-021-00334-6.
Bouchama, A., & Knochel, J.P. (2002). Heat
Stroke. New England Journal of
Medicine, 346(25), 1978–1988. https://
doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra011089.
Brake, D.J., & Bates, G.P. (2003). Fluid losses
and hydration status of industrial
workers under thermal stress working
extended shifts. Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 60(2), 90–96.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.2.90.
Brebner, D.F., Kerslake, D. McK., & Waddell,
J.L. (1958). The effect of atmospheric
humidity on the skin temperatures and
sweat rates of resting men at two ambient
temperatures. The Journal of Physiology,
144(2), 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1113/
jphysiol.1958.sp006102.
Bröde, P., Fiala, D., Lemke, B., & Kjellstrom,
T. (2018). Estimated work ability in
warm outdoor environments depends on
the chosen heat stress assessment metric.
International Journal of Biometeorology,
62(3), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00484-017-1346-9.
Buchheit, M., Voss, S.C., Nybo, L., Mohr, M.,
& Racinais, S. (2011). Physiological and
performance adaptations to an in-season
soccer camp in the heat: Associations
with heart rate and heart rate variability.
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine &
Science in Sports, 21(6). https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01378.x.
Budd, G.M. (2008). Wet-bulb globe
temperature (WBGT)—Its history and its
limitations. Journal of Science and
Medicine in Sport, 11(1), Article 1.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2007.
07.003.
Budhathoki, N.K., & Zander, K.K. (2019).
Socio-Economic Impact of and
Adaptation to Extreme Heat and Cold of
Farmers in the Food Bowl of Nepal.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 16(9), 1578.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16091578.
Burdett, K., & Mortensen, D.T. (1998). Wage
Differentials, Employer Size, and
Unemployment. International Economic
Review, 39(2), 257–273. https://doi.org/
10.2307/2527292.
Burdon, C.A., Johnson, N.A., Chapman, P.G.,
& O’Connor, H.T. (2012). Influence of
Beverage Temperature on Palatability
and Fluid Ingestion During Endurance
Exercise: A Systematic Review.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition
and Exercise Metabolism, 22(3), 199–
211. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsnem.22.
3.199.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). (n.d.).
Table 1.1.9. Implicit price deflators for
Gross Domestic Product. Retrieved
January 25, 2024, from https://
apps.bea.gov/iTable/?reqid=19.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). (2024).
Gross Domestic Product, Fourth Quarter
and Year 2023. https://www.bea.gov/
news/2024/gross-domestic-productfourth-quarter-and-year-2023-advanceestimate.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (n.d.).
Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities Latest
Numbers. Retrieved November 16, 2023,
PO 00000
Frm 00351
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71047
from https://www.bls.gov/iif/latestnumbers.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2012).
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries.
https://www.bls.gov/iif/overview/
cfoi.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2020a).
Productivity Measures: Business Sector
and Major Subsectors. In Handbook of
Methods. https://www.bls.gov/opub/
hom/msp/home.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2020b).
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses Data Quality Research. https://
www.bls.gov/iif/data-quality-research/
data-quality.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2021). BLS
Occupational Requirements Survey
Handbook of Methods. https://
www.bls.gov/opub/hom/ors/home.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023a).
American Time Use Survey. https://
www.bls.gov/tus/tables.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023b).
Databases, tables & calculators by
subject. Nonfatal cases involving days
away from work: Selected characteristics
(2011 forward). https://data.bls.gov/
PDQWeb/cs.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023c).
Occupational Employment and Wage
Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/oes/
tables.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023d).
Occupational Requirements Survey.
https://www.bls.gov/ors/data.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023e).
OIICS Version 3.0 Manual.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023f).
Quarterly Census of Employment and
Wages. https://data.bls.gov/cew/apps/
data_views/data_views.htm#tab=Tables.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023g).
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses, Biennial Case and
Demographic Numbers and Rates by
Case Type (2021–2022). https://
data.bls.gov/gqt/InitialPage.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2023h).
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses, Case and Demographic
Numbers for days away from work cases
(2011–2020). https://data.bls.gov/gqt/
InitialPage.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2024a).
2022 U.S. Business Response Survey.
https://www.bls.gov/brs/dataoverview.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2024b).
Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation—December 2023 (USDL–
24–0485). https://www.bls.gov/
news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2024c).
Fatal occupational injuries by selected
worker characteristics and selected event
or exposure, all U.S., all ownerships,
1992–2022. https://data.bls.gov/gqt/
InitialPage.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) JOLTS.
(2023, November 1). Table 2. Hires levels
and rates by industry and region,
seasonally adjusted. https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t02.htm.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) JOLTS.
(2024). Job Openings and Labor Turnover
Survey.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71048
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Bureau of Reclamation. (2015). Hoover Dam:
Fatalities at Hoover Dam: 1931 and
Earlier. Bureau of Reclamation. Bureau
of Reclamation. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/
hooverdam/history/essays/fat1931.html.
Burke, M., Hsiang, S.M., & Miguel, E. (2015).
Global non-linear effect of temperature
on economic production. Nature,
527(7577), 235–239. https://doi.org/
10.1038/nature15725.
Burke, M., Tanutama, V., Heft-Neal, S., Hino,
M., & Lobell, D. (2023). Game, Sweat,
Match: Temperature and Elite Worker
Productivity [Working paper]. National
Bureau of Economic Research.
Burton, D.J. (2006, October 1).
Dehumidification in Hot and Humid
Climates. Occupational Health & Safety.
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2006/10/
dehumidification-in-hot-and-humidclimates.aspx.
Bynum, G.D., Pandolf, K.B., Schuette, W.H.,
Goldman, R.F., Lees, D.L., Whang-Peng,
J., Atkinson, E.R., & Bull, J.M. (1978).
Induced hyperthermia in sedated
humans and the concept of critical
thermal maximum. American Journal of
Physiology, 235(5), R228–R236.
Cachon, G., Gallino, S., & Olivares, M. (2012).
Severe Weather and Automobile
Assembly Productivity. SSRN Electronic
Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/
ssrn.2099798.
Cai, X., Lu, Y., & Wang, J. (2018). The impact
of temperature on manufacturing worker
productivity: Evidence from personnel
data. Journal of Comparative Economics,
46(4), 889–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jce.2018.06.003.
Calegari, F., Calamari, L., & Frazzi, E. (2012).
Misting and fan cooling of the rest area
in a dairy barn. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 56(2), Article 2. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00484-011-0432-7.
California Code of Regulations (CCR), Tit. 8,
§ 3396) (Proposed Regulatory Text)
(2023). https://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb/
documents/Indoor-Heat-proptxt.pdf.
Calkins, M.M., Bonauto, D., Hajat, A.,
Lieblich, M., Seixas, N., Sheppard, L., &
Spector, J.T. (2019). A case-crossover
study of heat exposure and injury risk
among outdoor construction workers in
Washington State. Scandinavian Journal
of Work, Environment & Health, 45(6),
588–599. https://doi.org/10.5271/
sjweh.3814.
Cao, K.-X., Deng, Z.-C., Liu, M., Huang, Y.X., Yang, J.-C., & Sun, L.-H. (2023). Heat
Stress Impairs Male Reproductive
System with Potential Disruption of
Retinol Metabolism and Microbial
Balance in the Testis of Mice. The
Journal of Nutrition, 153(12), 3373–3381.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjnut.2023.
10.017.
Card, D. (2022). Who set your wage?.
American Economic Review, 112(4),
1075–1090.
Card, D., Cardoso, A.R., Heining, J., & Kline,
P. (2018). Firms and labor market
inequality: Evidence and some theory.
Journal of Labor Economics, 36(S1), S13–
S70.
Carter, J.B. (1999). Effectiveness of rest
pauses and cooling in alleviation of heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
stress during simulated fire-fighting
activity. Ergonomics, 42(2), 299–313.
https://doi.org/10.1080/001401
399185667.
Carter, R., Cheuvront, S.N., & Sawka, M.N.
(2007). A Case Report of Idiosyncratic
Hyperthermia and Review of U.S. Army
Heat Stroke Hospitalizations. Journal of
Sport Rehabilitation, 16(3), 238–243.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.16.3.238.
Carter, R., Cheuvront, S.N., Williams, J.O.,
Kolka, M.A., Stephenson, L.A., Sawka,
M.N., & Amoroso, P.J. (2005).
Epidemiology of Hospitalizations and
Deaths from Heat Illness in Soldiers.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise,
37(8), 1338–1334. https://doi.org/
10.1249/01.mss.0000174895.19639.ed.
Carter, R., Garcia, A.M., & Souhan, B.E.
(2011). Patients presenting with miliaria
while wearing flame resistant clothing in
high ambient temperatures: A case
series. Journal of Medical Case Reports,
5(1), 474. https://doi.org/10.1186/17521947-5-474.
Casa, D.J., Armstrong, L.E., Kenny, G.P.,
O’Connor, F.G., & Huggins, R.A. (2012).
Exertional Heat Stroke: New Concepts
Regarding Cause and Care. Current
Sports Medicine Reports, 11(3), 115–123.
https://doi.org/10.1249/JSR.0b013e
31825615cc.
Casa, D.J., DeMartini, J.K., Bergeron, M.F.,
Csillan, D., Eichner, E.R., Lopez, R.M.,
Ferrara, M.S., Miller, K.C., O’Connor, F.,
Sawka, M.N., & Yeargin, S.W. (2015).
National Athletic Trainers’ Association
Position Statement: Exertional Heat
Illnesses. Journal of Athletic Training,
50(9), 986–1000. https://doi.org/10.4085/
1062-6050-50.9.07.
Casa, D.J., McDermott, B.P., Lee, E.C.,
Yeargin, S.W., Armstrong, L.E., &
Maresh, C.M. (2007). Cold Water
Immersion: The Gold Standard for
Exertional Heatstroke Treatment.
Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews,
35(3), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1097/
jes.0b013e3180a02bec.
Census Bureau. (2021a). 2017 Statistics of
U.S. Businesses (SUSB) Annual Data
Tables by Establishment Industry https://
www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/
susb/2017-susb-annual.html.
Census Bureau. (2021b). County Business
Patterns (CBP): 2021. https://
www.census.gov/content/census/en/
data/datasets/2021/econ/cbp/2021cbp.html.
Census Bureau. (2023a). 2021 State & Local
Government Finance Historical Datasets
and Tables. https://www.census.gov/
data/datasets/2021/econ/local/publicuse-datasets.html.
Census Bureau. (2023b). 2022 Census of
Governments, Survey of Public
Employment & Payroll Datasets &
Tables. https://www.census.gov/data/
datasets/2022/econ/apes/2022.html.
Census Bureau. (2023c). 2022—Public Use
Files. https://www.census.gov/data/
datasets/2022/econ/gus/public-usefiles.html.
Census Bureau. (2023d). 2022 Government
Units Survey. https://www.census.gov/
programs-surveys/gus/data/orgpublicuse
files.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00352
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Census Bureau. (2024a). About this Program.
https://www.census.gov/programssurveys/susb/about.html.
Census Bureau. (2024b). Statistics of U.S.
Businesses Glossary. https://
www.census.gov/programs-surveys/susb/
about/glossary.html.
Census Bureau, & National Center for Science
and Engineering Statistics. (2023).
Annual Business Survey. https://
www.census.gov/data/tables/2023/econ/
abs/2023-abs-first-look.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). (2019). Prescription drug use in
the past 30 days, by sex, race and
Hispanic origin, and age: United States
selected years 1988–1994 through 2015–
2018 (Issue Table 39).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). (2022). Tips for Preventing HeatRelated Illness. https://www.cdc.gov/
disasters/extremeheat/heattips.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). (2023, February 8). Death
Investigation Systems. www.cdc.gov/
phlp/publications/coroner/death.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). (2024a). Extremes of
Temperature. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/
travel/yellowbook/2024/environmentalhazards-risks/extremes-of-temperature.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). (2024b). Heat and Medications—
Guidance for Clinicians. https://
www.cdc.gov/heat-health/hcp/heat-andmedications-guidance-forclinicians.html.
Cervellin, G., Comelli, I., & Lippi, G. (2010).
Rhabdomyolysis: Historical background,
clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic
features. Cclm, 48(6), 749–756. https://
doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2010.151
Chan, A.P.C., Yi, W., Wong, D.P., Yam,
M.C.H., & Chan, D.W.M. (2012).
Determining an optimal recovery time
for construction rebar workers after
working to exhaustion in a hot and
humid environment. Building and
Environment, 58, 163–171. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.07.006.
Chan, M. (2011). Fatigue: The most critical
accident risk in oil and gas construction.
Construction Management and
Economics, 29(4), 341–353. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2010.545993.
Chapman, C.L., Johnson, B.D., Vargas, N.T.,
Hostler, D., Parker, M.D., & Schlader, Z.J.
(2020). Both hyperthermia and
dehydration during physical work in the
heat contribute to the risk of acute
kidney injury. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 128(4), 715–728. https://
doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.
00787.2019.
Charlot, K., Tardo-Dino, P.-E., Buchet, J.-F.,
Koulmann, N., Bourdon, S., Lepetit, B.,
Roslonski, M., Jousseaume, L., &
Malgoyre, A. (2017). Short-Term, LowVolume Training Improves Heat
Acclimatization in an Operational
Context. Frontiers in Physiology, 8, 419.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.
2017.00419.
Chawla, L.S., Eggers, P.W., Star, R.A., &
Kimmel, P.L. (2014). Acute Kidney
Injury and Chronic Kidney Disease as
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Interconnected Syndromes. New
England Journal of Medicine, 371(1), 58–
66. https://doi.org/10.1056/
NEJMra1214243.
Cheela, V., John, M., Biswas, W., & Sarker, P.
(2021). Combating Urban Heat Island
Effect—A Review of Reflective
Pavements and Tree Shading Strategies.
Buildings, 11(3), 93. https://doi.org/
10.3390/buildings11030093.
Chen, M.-L., Chen, C.-J., Yeh, W.-Y., Huang,
J.-W., & Mao, I.-F. (2003). Heat Stress
Evaluation and Worker Fatigue in a Steel
Plant. AIHA Journal, 64(3), 352–359.
https://doi.org/10.1080/
15428110308984827.
Chen, X., & Yang, L. (2019). Temperature and
industrial output: Firm-level evidence
from China. Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, 95, 257–
274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.
2017.07.009.
Chersich, M.F., Pham, M.D., Areal, A.,
Haghighi, M.M., Manyuchi, A., Swift,
C.P., Wernecke, B., Robinson, M., Hetem,
R., Boeckmann, M., & Hajat, S. (2020).
Associations between high temperatures
in pregnancy and risk of preterm birth,
low birth weight, and stillbirths:
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
BMJ, m3811. https://doi.org/10.1136/
bmj.m3811.
Chesson, B. (2012). Working Safely in the
Heat—Field Support Initiatives. SPE–
156735–MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/
156735-MS.
Chicas, R., Xiuhtecutli, N., Dickman, N.E.,
Flocks, J., Scammell, M.K., Steenland,
K., Hertzberg, V., & McCauley, L. (2021).
Cooling Interventions Among
Agricultural Workers: Qualitative FieldBased Study. Hispanic Health Care
International, 19(3), 174–181. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1540415321993429.
Cho, H. (2017). The effects of summer heat
on academic achievement: A cohort
analysis. Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, 83, 185–
196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2017.
03.005.
Chong, D., Zhu, N., Luo, W., Zhang, Z., &
Pan, X. (2020). Effects of heat
acclimation on individual safety
performance in hyperthermal indoor
environments. Building and
Environment, 168, 106537. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106537.
Clifford, J., Kerslake, D. McK., & Waddell, J.L.
(1959). The effect of wind speed on
maximum evaporative capacity in man.
The Journal of Physiology, 147(2), 253–
259. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.
1959.sp006240.
CNMI Department of Commerce. (2017). 2015
Commonwealth of the Northern
Marianas Islands Statistical Yearbook.
https://ver1.cnmicommerce.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/11/2015Yearbook-11222017.pdf.
Coca, S.G., Singanamala, S., & Parikh, C.R.
(2012). Chronic kidney disease after
acute kidney injury: A systematic review
and meta-analysis. Kidney International,
81(5), 442–448. https://doi.org/10.1038/
ki.2011.379.
Code of Maryland Regulations 09 12 32: Heat
Stress Standards. (2024). MD Draft Heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Stress Standard. https://
www.dllr.state.md.us/labor/
dliheatstressillnessprevstandard
draft.pdf.
Colacito, R., Hoffmann, B., & Phan, T. (2019).
Temperature and Growth: A Panel
Analysis of the United States. Journal of
Money, Credit and Banking, 51(2–3),
313–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jmcb.12574.
Colmer, J. (2021). Temperature, Labor
Reallocation, and Industrial Production:
Evidence from India. American
Economic Journal: Applied Economics,
13(4), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1257/
app.20190249.
Commandant of the Marine Corps. (2002).
Marine Corps Order 6200.1E W/CH1:
Marine Corps heat injury prevention
program. https://www.imef.marines.mil/
Portals/68/Docs/IMEF/Surgeon/MCO_
6200.1E_W_CH_1_Heat_Injury_
Prevention.pdf.
Cooper, E.R., Ferrara, M.S., Casa, D.J., Powell,
J.W., Broglio, S.P., Resch, J.E., &
Courson, R.W. (2016). Exertional Heat
Illness in American Football Players:
When Is the Risk Greatest? Journal of
Athletic Training, 51(8), 593–600.
https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-605051.8.08.
Coris, E.E., Ramirez, A.M., & Van Durme, D.J.
(2004). Heat Illness in Athletes: The
Dangerous Combination of Heat,
Humidity and Exercise. Sports Medicine,
34(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.2165/
00007256-200434010-00002.
Correa-Calderon, A., Armstrong, D., Donald,
R., DeNise, S., Enns, M., & Howison, C.
(2004). Thermoregulatory responses of
Holstein and Brown Swiss Heat-Stressed
dairy cows to two different cooling
systems. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 48(3), Article 3. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00484-003-0194-y.
Costantino, A., Maiese, A., Lazzari, J., Casula,
C., Turillazzi, E., Frati, P., & Fineschi, V.
(2023). The Dark Side of Energy Drinks:
A Comprehensive Review of Their
Impact on the Human Body. Nutrients,
15(18), 3922. https://doi.org/10.3390/
nu15183922.
Costrini, A.M., Pitt, H.A., Gustafson, A., &
Uddin, D. (1979). Cardiovascular and
metabolic manifestations of heat stroke
and severe heat exhaustion. The
American Journal of Medicine, 66, 296–
302.
Cramer, M.N., & Jay, O. (2016). Biophysical
aspects of human thermoregulation
during heat stress. Autonomic
Neuroscience, 196, 3–13. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.autneu.2016.03.001.
Crandall, C.G., Wilson, T.E., Marving, J.,
Vogelsang, T.W., Kjaer, A., Hesse, B., &
Secher, N.H. (2008). Effects of passive
heating on central blood volume and
ventricular dimensions in humans. The
Journal of Physiology, 586(1), 293–301.
https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.
2007.143057.
Crowe, J., Joubert, B.R., & Brooks, D.R. (2020).
Third International Workshop on
Chronic Kidney Diseases of Uncertain/
Non-Traditional Etiology in
Mesoamerica and Other Regions.
PO 00000
Frm 00353
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71049
Crowe, J., Nilsson, M., Kjellstrom, T., &
Wesseling, C. (2015). Heat-Related
symptoms in sugarcane harvesters.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
58(5), 541–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ajim.22450.
Cuddy, M.L.S. (2004). The Effects of Drugs on
Thermoregulation: AACN Clinical Issues:
Advanced Practice in Acute and Critical
Care, 15(2), 238–253. https://doi.org/
10.1097/00044067-200404000-00010.
Dally, M., Butler-Dawson, J., Krisher, L.,
Monaghan, A., Weitzenkamp, D.,
Sorensen, C., Johnson, R.J., Carlton, E.J.,
Asensio, C., Tenney, L., & Newman, L.S.
(2018). The impact of heat and impaired
kidney function on productivity of
Guatemalan sugarcane workers. PLOS
ONE, 13(10), e0205181. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0205181.
Dally, M., Butler-Dawson, J., Sorensen, C.J.,
Van Dyke, M., James, K.A., Krisher, L.,
Jaramillo, D., & Newman, L.S. (2020).
Wet Bulb Globe Temperature and
Recorded Occupational Injury Rates
among Sugarcane Harvesters in
Southwest Guatemala. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 17(21), 8195. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218195.
Dang, B.N., & Dowell, C.H. (2014). Factors
Associated With Heat Strain Among
Workers at an Aluminum Smelter in
Texas. Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 56(3), 313–318.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000
000000095.
Dantas, G.H.M., De Alkmim Moreira Nunes,
R., Casimiro-Lopes, G., Neves, E.B., De
Castro, J.B.P., & De Souza Vale, R.G.
(2022). Analysis of physiological markers
and risk factors for the development of
rhabdomyolysis in military personnel: A
systematic review. Reviews on
Environmental Health, 38(4), 613–620.
https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2022-0038.
DARA. (2012). Climate Vulnerability Monitor
2nd Edition.
Dasgupta, S., van Maanen, N., Gosling, S.N.,
Piontek, F., Otto, C., & Schleussner, C.F. (2021). Effects of climate change on
combined labour productivity and
supply: An empirical, multi-model
study. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(7),
e455–e465. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S2542-5196(21)00170-4.
Davidson, B.D., Dado-Senn, B., Padilla, N.R.,
Fabris, T.F., Casarotto, L.T., Ouellet, V.,
Toledo, I.M., Dahl, G.E., & Laporta, J.
(2021). Late-gestation heat stress
abatement in dairy heifers promotes
thermoregulation and improves
productivity. Journal of Dairy Science,
104, 2357–2368. https://doi.org/10.3168/
jds.2020-18998.
Day, E., Fankhauser, S., Kingsmill, N., Costa,
H., & Mavrogianni, A. (2019). Upholding
labour productivity under climate
change: An assessment of adaptation
options. Climate Policy, 19(3), Article 3.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.
1517640.
De Fleurian, G., Perrin, J., Ecochard, R.,
Dantony, E., Lanteaume, A., Achard, V.,
Grillo, J., Guichaoua, M., Botta, A., &
Sari-Minodier, I. (2009). Occupational
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71050
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Exposures Obtained by Questionnaire in
Clinical Practice and Their Association
With Semen Quality. Journal of
Andrology, 30(5), 566–579. https://
doi.org/10.2164/jandrol.108.005918.
de Lima, C.Z., Buzan, J.R., Moore, F.C.,
Baldos, U.L.C., Huber, M., & Hertel, T.W.
(2021). Heat stress on agricultural
workers exacerbates crop impacts of
climate change. Environmental Research
Letters, 16(4), 044020. https://doi.org/
10.1088/1748-9326/abeb9f.
Debela, M.B., Begosaw, A.M., Deyessa, N., &
Azage, M. (2023). The Burdens of
Occupational Heat Exposure-related
Symptoms and Contributing Factors
Among Workers in Sugarcane Factories
in Ethiopia: Heat Stress Wet Bulb Globe
Temperature Meter. Safety and Health at
Work, 14(3), 325–331. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.shaw.2023.08.003.
DeGroot, D.W., Henderson, K.N., & O’Connor,
F.G. (2023). Cooling Modality
Effectiveness and Mortality Associate
With Prehospital Care of Exertional Heat
Stroke Casualties. The Journal of
Emergency Medicine, 64(2), 175–180.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.
2022.12.015.
Dell, M., Jones, B.F., & Olken, B.A. (2012).
Temperature Shocks and Economic
Growth: Evidence from the Last Half
Century. American Economic Journal:
Macroeconomics, 4(3), 66–95. https://
doi.org/10.1257/mac.4.3.66.
Dell, M., Jones, B.F., & Olken, B.A. (2014).
What Do We Learn from the Weather?
The New Climate-Economy Literature.
Journal of Economic Literature, 52(3),
740–798. https://doi.org/10.1257/
jel.52.3.740.
Dellinger, A.M., Kachur, P.S., Sternberg, E.,
& Russell, J. (1996). Risk of Heat-Related
Injury to Disaster Relief Workers in a
Slow-Onset Flood Disaster: Journal of
Occupational & Environmental
Medicine, 38(7), 689–692. https://
doi.org/10.1097/00043764-19960700000011.
Deloitte. (2022). The turning point: A new
economic climate in the United States.
Demartini, J.K., Casa, D.J., Stearns, R., Belval,
L., Crago, A., Davis, R., & Jardine, J.
(2015). Effectiveness of Cold Water
Immersion in the Treatment of
Exertional Heat Stroke at the Falmouth
Road Race. Medicine & Science in Sports
& Exercise, 47(2), 240–245. https://
doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0000000000000409.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2019).
2017 Census of Agriculture: United
States Summary and State Data. https://
www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/
AgCensus/2017/Full_Report/Volume_1,_
Chapter_1_US/usv1.pdf.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2020).
2017 Census of Agriculture: Puerto Rico
(2018) Island and Regional Data. https://
www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/
AgCensus/2017/Full_Report/Outlying_
Areas/Puerto_Rico/prv1.pdf.
Department of Labor (DOL). (2022). Findings
from the National Agricultural Workers
Survey (NAWS) 2019–2020: A
Demographic and Employment Profile of
United States Farmworkers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Department of Labor (DOL). (2023a).
Minimum Length of Meal Period
Required Under State Law for Adult
Employees in Private Sector 1.
Department of Labor (DOL). (2023b).
Minimum Paid Rest Period Requirements
Under State Law for Adult Employees in
Private Sector.
Department of Labor (DOL) (2024a). Meeting
Notes of the May 15, 2024 Tribal
Consultation.
Department of Labor (DOL). (2024b). Office of
Labor-Management Standards (OLMS)—
LM Reports and Constitutions and
Bylaws.
Department of the Army. (2022). Heat Stress
Control and Heat Casualty Management.
Technical Bulletin, Medical 507. https://
armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_
a/ARN35159-TB_MED_507-000-WEB1.pdf.
Department of the Army. (2023). Prevention
of Heat and Cold Casualties. TRADOC
Regulation 350–29. https://
adminpubs.tradoc.army.mil/regulations/
TR350-29.pdf.
Department of the Navy. (2023). Prevention
of heat and cold stress injuries (ashore,
afloat, and ground forces). In Manual of
Naval Preventive Medicine (NAVMED P–
5010–3 (Rev. 0 8–2023)). https://
www.med.navy.mil/LinkClick.aspx?
fileticket=3dWaYBQLTeM%3D&
tabid=13487&portalid=62&mid=51330.
Department of Transportation (DOT). (2021).
Departmental Guidance: Treatment of
the Value of Preventing Fatalities and
Injuries in Preparing Economic Analyses.
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/
dot.gov/files/2021-03/DOT%20VSL%20
Guidance%20-%202021%20Update.pdf.
Department of Transportation (DOT). (2024).
Departmental Guidance on Valuation of
a Statistical Life in Economic Analysis.
https://www.transportation.gov/officepolicy/transportation-policy/reviseddepartmental-guidance-on-valuation-ofa-statistical-life-in-economic-analysis.
Derrick, E.H. (1934). Heat Cramps and
Uremic Cramps, With Special Reference
to their Treatment with Sodium
Chloride. Medical Journal of Australia,
2(19), 612–616. https://doi.org/10.5694/
j.1326-5377.1934.tb91456.x.
Deryugina, T., & Hsiang, S. (2014). Does the
Environment Still Matter? Daily
Temperature and Income in the United
States (w20750; p. w20750). National
Bureau of Economic Research. https://
doi.org/10.3386/w20750.
DiBeneditto, J.R., & Worobec, S.M. (1985).
Exposure to hot environments can cause
dermatological problems. Occupational
Health & Safety, 54(1), 35–38.
Dickinson, J.G. (1994). Heat Illness in the
Services. Journal of the Royal Army
Medical Corps, 140(1), 7–12. https://
doi.org/10.1136/jramc-140-01-02.
Dill, D.B., & Costill, D.L. (1974). Calculation
of percentage changes in volumes of
blood, plasma, and red cells in
dehydration. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 37(2), 247–248. https://
doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1974.37.2.247.
Dillender, M. (2021). Climate Change and
Occupational Health: Are There Limits
PO 00000
Frm 00354
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
to Our Ability to Adapt? Journal of
Human Resources, 56(1), 184–224.
https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.56.1.07189594R3.
DiscountMugs. (2024). 20 oz. Water Bottles
with Push Cap. DiscountMugs.com.
Distefano, L.J., Casa, D.J., Vansumeren, M.M.,
Karslo, R.M., Huggins, R.A., Demartini,
J.K., Stearns, R.L., Armstrong, L.E., &
Maresh, C.M. (2013). Hypohydration and
Hyperthermia Impair Neuromuscular
Control after Exercise. Medicine &
Science in Sports & Exercise, 45(6),
1166–1173. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0b013e3182805b83.
do Nascimento Mós, J.V., Teixeira, B.E.,
Murata, L.S., dos Santos, V.M., de
Oliveira, E.M., Steidle Neto, A.J., &
Nascimento, S.T. (2022). Thermal
comfort provided by different shading
structures in free-range systems in
Brazilian savanna. International Journal
of Biometeorology, 66(3), 535–544.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-02102214-w.
Dong, X.S., West, G.H., Holloway-Beth, A.,
Wang, X., & Sokas, R.K. (2019). Heatrelated deaths among construction
workers in the United States. American
Journal of Industrial Medicine, 62(12),
1047–1057. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ajim.23024.
Donoghue, A.M. (2004). Heat illness in the
U.S. mining industry. American Journal
of Industrial Medicine, 45(4), 351–356.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.10345.
Donoghue, A.M., & Sinclair, M.J. (2000).
Miliaria Rubra of the Lower Limbs in
Underground Miners. Occupational
Medicine, 50(6), 430–433. https://
doi.org/10.1093/occmed/50.6.430.
Donoghue, A.M., Sinclair, M.J., & Bates, G.P.
(2000). Heat exhaustion in a deep
underground metalliferous mine.
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 57(3), 165–174. https://
doi.org/10.1136/oem.57.3.165.
Donoghue, E.R., Graham, M.A., Jentzen, J.M.,
Lifschultz, B.D., Luke, J.L., &
Mirchandani, H.G. (1997). Criteria for the
Diagnosis of Heat-Related Deaths:
National Association of Medical
Examiners: Position Paper. The
American Journal of Forensic Medicine
and Pathology, 18(1), 11–14.
Dowell, C.H., & Tapp, L.C. (2007). NIOSH:
Evaluation of Heat Stress at a Glass
Bottle Manufacturer. U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, National
Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, DHHS (NIOSH).
Drwencke, A.M., Tresoldi, G., Stevens, M.M.,
Narayanan, V., Carrazco, A.V.,
Mitloehner, F.M., Pistochini, T.E., &
Tucker, C.B. (2020). Innovative cooling
strategies: Dairy cow responses and
water and energy use. Journal of Dairy
Science, 103, 5440–5454. https://doi.org/
10.3168/jds.2019-17351.
Dufour, A., & Candas, V. (2007). Ageing and
thermal responses during passive heat
exposure: Sweating and sensory aspects.
European Journal of Applied Physiology,
100(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00421-007-0396-9.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Dukes-Dobos, F.N. (1981). Hazards of heat
exposure. A review. Scandinavian
Journal of Work, Environment & Health,
7(2), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.5271/
sjweh.2560.
Dukes-Dobos, F.N., & Henschel, A. (1973).
Development of permissible heat
exposure limits for occupational work.
Journal of the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers, 15(5), 57–62.
Dunne, J.P., Stouffer, R.J., & John, J.G. (2013).
Reductions in labour capacity from heat
stress under climate warming. Nature
Climate Change, 3(6), 563–566. https://
doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1827.
DuPont. (2024). Tyvek FAQs. Dupont.Com.
https://www.dupont.com/tyvekdesign/
design-with-tyvek/dupont-tyvekfaq.html.
Eastern Research Group (ERG), Inc. (2022a).
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention: Heat
and Productivity Articles.
Eastern Research Group (ERG), Inc. (2022b).
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention: Rest
Breaks and Productivity Articles.
Eastern Research Group (ERG), Inc. (2022c).
Literature Review: Productivity and Work
Breaks.
Eastern Research Group (ERG), Inc. (2024a).
The History of Heat as an Occupational
Hazard.
Eastern Research Group (ERG), Inc. (2024b).
Heat Index Monitors with Data Storage
Market Research.
Eisenberg, J., Li, J.F., & Feldmann, K.D.
(2019). Evaluation of rhabdomyolysis
and heat stroke in structural firefighter
cadets (HHE Report No. 2018–0154–
3361). Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
Eisenberg, J., & Methner, M. (2014).
Evaluation of Heat Stress Heat Strain
and Rhabdomyolysis in Park Employees
(2013–0109–3214). Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
Eisenberg, J., Methner, M., Dowell, C.H., &
Mueller, C. (2015). Evaluation of Heat
Stress, Heat Strain and Rhabdomyolysis
during Structural Fire Fighter Training
(2012–039–3242). Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
Eisenberg, M.L., Chen, Z., Ye, A., & Buck
Louis, G.M. (2015). Relationship between
physical occupational exposures and
health on semen quality: Data from the
Longitudinal Investigation of Fertility
and the Environment (LIFE) Study.
Fertility and Sterility, 103(5), 1271–1277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.
2015.02.010.
Eldridge, L.P., Wulff Pabilonia, S., Palmer,
D., Stewart, J., & Varghese, J. (2022,
October). Improving estimates of hours
worked for US productivity
measurement. Monthly Labor Review.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2022/
article/improving-estimates-of-hoursworked-for-us-productivitymeasurement.htm.
Energy Information Administration (EIA).
(2022). Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey (CBECS): 2018
CBECS Data. https://www.eia.gov/
consumption/commercial/data/2018/.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
(1993). A Guide to Heat Stress in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Agriculture (EPA–750–b–92–001).
United States Environmental Protection
Agency. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/
ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=20001L0D.TXT.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
(2002). Economic Analysis for the
Amended Inventory Update Final Rule.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
(2021). Appendix F. Labor. In Climate
Change and Social Vulnerability in the
United States: A Focus on Six Impacts
(EPA 430–R–21–003). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
https://www.epa.gov/cira/socialvulnerability-report.
Epstein, Y., Keren, G., Moisseiev, J., Gasko,
O., & Yachin, S. (1980). Psychomotor
deterioration during exposure to heat.
Aviation, Space, and Environmental
Medicine, 51(6), 607–610.
Epstein, Y., Moran, D. S., Shapiro, Y., Sohar,
E., & Shemer, J. (1999). Exertional
Heatstroke: A Case Series. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 31(2),
224–228.
Epstein, Y., Sohar, E., & Shapiro, Y. (1995).
Exertional Heatstroke: A Preventable
Condition. Israel Journal of Medical
Sciences, 31(7), 454–462.
Epstein, Y., & Yanovich, R. (2019).
Heatstroke. New England Journal of
Medicine, 380(25), 2449–2459. https://
doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1810762.
Ergodyne. (2020). The Heat is On: A Look at
Workplace Heat Stress Prevention.
Erickson, E.A., Engel, L.S., Christenbury, K.,
Weems, L., Schwartz, E.G., & Rusiecki,
J.A. (2019). Environmental Heat
Exposure and Heat-Related Symptoms in
United States Coast Guard Deepwater
Horizon Disaster Responders. Disaster
Medicine and Public Health
Preparedness, 13(3), 561–569. https://
doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2018.120.
Fagan, K.M., & Hodgson, M.J. (2017). Underrecording of work-related injuries and
illnesses: An OSHA priority. Journal of
Safety Research, 60, 79–83. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2016.12.002.
Fair Foods Standards Council. (2021). Fair
Food Program Report, 2021.
Fakheri, R.J., & Goldfarb, D.S. (2011).
Ambient temperature as a contributor to
kidney stone formation: Implications of
global warming. Kidney International,
79(11), 1178–1185. https://doi.org/
10.1038/ki.2011.76.
Fall, W., Thelen, M., Modji, K., & McCoy, K.
(2024). Heat-Related Illness on the Job: A
Look at Worker’s Compensation Claims
in Wisconsin (2010–2022). Wisconsin
Bureau of Environmental and
Occupational Health. https://
www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/publications/
p03497.pdf.
Fan, Z.J., Bonauto, D.K., Foley, M.P., &
Silverstein, B.A. (2006). Underreporting
of Work-Related Injury or Illness to
Workers’ Compensation: Individual and
Industry Factors. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 48(9), 914–922. https://
doi.org/10.1097/01.jom.0000226253.
54138.1e.
Federspiel, C.C., Fisk, W.J., Price, P.N., Liu,
G., Faulkner, D., Dibartolomeo, D.L.,
PO 00000
Frm 00355
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71051
Sullivan, D.P., & Lahiff, M. (2004).
Worker performance and ventilation in a
call center: Analyses of work
performance data for registered nurses.
Indoor Air, 14(s8), 41–50. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1600-0668.2004.00299.x.
Figa-Talamanca, I., Dell’Orco, V., Pupi, A.,
Dondero, F., Gandini, L., Lenzi, A.,
Lombardo, F., Scavalli, P., & Mancini, G.
(1992). Fertility and semen quality of
workers exposed to high temperatures in
the ceramics industry. Reproductive
Toxicology, 6, 517–523.
Financial Oversight and Management Board
for Puerto Rico. (2023). FY24 Certified
Budget for the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico.
Fire Administration (USFA). (2023). National
Fire Department Registry: Download
Departments. https://
apps.usfa.fema.gov/registry/download.
Firehouse Magazine. (2022a). 2021
Combination Fire Department Run
Survey. https://www.firehouse.com/
careers-education/document/21259700/
2021-combination-fire-department-runsurvey.
Firehouse Magazine. (2022b). National Run
Survey 2021—Part 1. https://
www.firehouse.com/careers-education/
document/21268861/national-runsurvey-2021-part-1.
Fisher, A.D., Roberts, N., Bluett, S.J., Verkerk,
G.A., & Matthews, L.R. (2008). Effects of
shade provision on the behaviour, body
temperature and milk production of
grazing dairy cows during a New
Zealand summer. New Zealand Journal
of Agricultural Research, 51(2), 99–105.
https://doi.org/10.1080/
00288230809510439.
Fisk, W.J. (2000). Health and productivity
gains from better indoor environments
and their relationship with building
energy efficiency. Annual Review of
Energy and the Environment, 25(1), 537–
566. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.energy.25.1.537.
Fleischer, N.L., Tiesman, H.M., Sumitani, J.,
Mize, T., Amarnath, K.K., Bayakly, A.R.,
& Murphy, M.W. (2013). Public Health
Impact of Heat-Related Illness Among
Migrant Farmworkers. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine, 44(3), 199–206.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.
2012.10.020.
Flocks, J., Vi Thien Mac, V., Runkle, J.,
Tovar-Aguilar, J.A., Economos, J., &
McCauley, L.A. (2013). Female
Farmworkers’ Perceptions of HeatRelated Illness and Pregnancy Health.
Journal of Agromedicine, 18(4), 350–358.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.
2013.826607.
Florida Department of Health (DOH). (2011).
Descriptive analysis of occupational
heat-related illness treated in Florida
hospitals and emergency departments.
Florida Department of Health, Division
of Environmental Health. https://
www.floridahealth.gov/%5C/
environmental-health/occupationalhealth-surveillance/_documents/occheat-related-illness.pdf.
Flouris, A.D., Dinas, P.C., Ioannou, L.G.,
Nybo, L., Havenith, G., Kenny, G.P., &
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71052
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Kjellstrom, T. (2018). Workers’ health
and productivity under occupational
heat strain: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. The Lancet Planetary
Health, 2(12), e521–e531. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30237-7.
Flouris, A.D., Ioannou, L.G., Mayor, T.S., &
Hernandez, R.C.S. (2020). D3.5: Report
on solutions to mitigate heat stress of
construction sector workers.
Fogleman, M., Fakhrzadeh, L., & Bernard, T.
E. (2005). The relationship between
outdoor thermal conditions and acute
injury in an aluminum smelter.
International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 35(1), 47–55. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2004.08.003.
Foster, J., Hodder, S.G., Goodwin, J., &
Havenith, G. (2020). Occupational Heat
Stress and Practical Cooling Solutions
for Healthcare and Industry Workers
During the COVID–19 Pandemic. Annals
of Work Exposures and Health, 64(9),
Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1093/
annweh/wxaa082.
Foster, J., Smallcombe, J.W., Hodder, S., Jay,
O., Flouris, A.D., & Havenith, G. (2022a).
Quantifying the impact of heat on human
physical work capacity; part II: The
observed interaction of air velocity with
temperature, humidity, sweat rate, and
clothing is not captured by most heat
stress indices. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 66(3), 507–520. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00484-021-02212-y.
Foster, J., Smallcombe, J.W., Hodder, S., Jay,
O., Flouris, A.D., Nybo, L., & Havenith,
G. (2021). An advanced empirical model
for quantifying the impact of heat and
climate change on human physical work
capacity. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 65(7), 1215–1229.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-02102105-0.
Foster, J., Smallcombe, J.W., Hodder, S., Jay,
O., Flouris, A.D., Nybo, L., & Havenith,
G. (2022b). Quantifying the impact of
heat on human physical work capacity;
part III: The impact of solar radiation
varies with air temperature, humidity,
and clothing coverage. International
Journal of Biometeorology, 66(1), 175–
188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-02102205-x.
Fouillet, A., Rey, G., Laurent, F., Pavillon, G.,
Bellec, S., Guihenneuc-Jouyaux, C.,
Clavel, J., Jougla, E., & Hémon, D. (2006).
Excess mortality related to the August
2003 heat wave in France. International
Archives of Occupational and
Environmental Health, 80(1), 16–24.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-0060089-4.
Fournel, S., Ouellet, V., & Charbonneau, É.
(2017). Practices for Alleviating Heat
Stress of Dairy Cows in Humid
Continental Climates: A Literature
Review. Animals, 7(12), 37. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ani7050037.
Fowler, D., Mitchell, C., Brown, A., Pollock,
T., Bratka, L., Paulson, J., Noller, A.,
Mauskapf, R., Oscanyan, K.,
Vaidyanathan, A., Wolkin, A., Taylor, E.,
& Radcliffe, R. (2013). Heat-related
deaths after an extreme heat event—Four
states, 2012, and United States, 1999–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
2009. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, 62(22), 433–436.
Freund, J., Joyner, J., Jilka, M., Nittolo, M.,
Andrew, J., & Wilmore, H. (1987).
Thermoregulation during prolonged
exercise in heat: Alterations with betaadrenergic blockade. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 63(3), 930–936.
Gagnon, D., Jay, O., Lemire, B., & Kenny, G.P.
(2008). Sex-related differences in
evaporative heat loss: The importance of
metabolic heat production. European
Journal of Applied Physiology, 104(5),
821–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421008-0837-0.
Gagnon, D., & Kenny, G.P. (2011). Sex
modulates whole-body sudomotor
thermosensitivity during exercise. The
Journal of Physiology, 589(24), 6205–
6217. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.
2011.219220.
Gagnon, D., & Kenny, G.P. (2012). Sex
differences in thermoeffector responses
during exercise at fixed requirements for
heat loss. Journal of Applied Physiology,
113(5), 746–757. https://doi.org/10.1152/
japplphysiol.00637.2012.
Gagnon, D., Romero, S.A., Cramer, M.N., Jay,
O., & Crandall, C.G. (2016). Cardiac and
Thermal Strain of Elderly Adults
Exposed to Extreme Heat and Humidity
With and Without Electric Fan Use.
JAMA, 316(9), 989. https://doi.org/
10.1001/jama.2016.10550.
Galer, M. (2019). The heat center initiative:
Heat illness awareness. https://
www.army.mil/article/218736/the_heat_
center_initiative_heat_illness_awareness.
Games, K.E., Winkelmann, Z. K., McGinnis,
K.D., McAdam, J.S., Pascoe, D.D., &
Sefton, J.M. (2020). Functional
Performance of Firefighters After
Exposure to Environmental Conditions
and Exercise. Journal of Athletic
Training, 55(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/
10.4085/1062-6050-75-18.
Garcia, C.K., Renteria, L.I., Leite-Santos, G.,
Leon, L. R., & Laitano, O. (2022).
Exertional heat stroke: Pathophysiology
and risk factors. BMJ Medicine, 1(1),
e000239. https://doi.org/10.1136/
bmjmed-2022-000239.
Garcı́a-Trabanino, R., Jarquı́n, E., Wesseling,
C., Johnson, R.J., González-Quiroz, M.,
Weiss, I., Glaser, J., José Vindell, J.,
Stockfelt, L., Roncal, C., Harra, T., &
Barregard, L. (2015). Heat stress,
dehydration, and kidney function in
sugarcane cutters in El Salvador—A
cross-shift study of workers at risk of
Mesoamerican nephropathy.
Environmental Research, 142, 746–755.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.
2015.07.007.
Gardner, J.W., Kark, J.A., Karnei, K., Sanborn,
J.S., Gastaldo, E., Burr, P., & Wenger, C.B.
(1996). Risk factors predicting exertional
heat illness in male Marine Corps
recruits: Medicine & Science in Sports &
Exercise, 28(8), 939–944. https://doi.org/
10.1097/00005768-199608000-00001.
Gardner, J.W., & Kork, J.A. (1994). Fatal
Rhabdomyolysis Presenting as Mild Heat
Illness in Military Training. Military
Medicine, 159(2), 160–163. https://
doi.org/10.1093/milmed/159.2.160.
PO 00000
Frm 00356
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Gardner, L., Miller, D.M., Daly, C., Gupta,
P.K., House, C., Roiz De Sa, D., Shaw,
M.-A., & Hopkins, P.M. (2020).
Investigating the genetic susceptibility to
exertional heat illness. Journal of
Medical Genetics, 57(8), 531–541.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2019106461.
Garg, T., Gibson, M., & Sun, F. (2020a).
Extreme temperatures and time use in
China. Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organization, 180, 309–324. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2020.10.016.
Garg, T., Jagnani, M., & Taraz, V. (2020b).
Temperature and Human Capital in
India. Journal of the Association of
Environmental and Resource
Economists, 7(6), 1113–1150. https://
doi.org/10.1086/710066.
Garrett, J. W., & Teizer, J. (2009). Human
Factors Analysis Classification System
Relating to Human Error Awareness
Taxonomy in Construction Safety.
Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 135(8), 754–763. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.19437862.0000034.
Garrow, Valerie. (2016). Presenteeism: A
review of current thinking. Institute for
Employment Studies (IES).
Garzón-Villalba, X.P., Ashley, C.D., &
Bernard, T. E. (2019). Benchmarking
Heat Index as an occupational exposure
limit for heat stress. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 16(8), 557–563. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2019.1628348.
Garzón-Villalba, X.P., Mbah, A., Wu, Y.,
Hiles, M., Moore, H., Schwartz, S.W., &
Bernard, T.E. (2016). Exertional heat
illness and acute injury related to
ambient wet bulb globe temperature.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
59(12), 1169–1176. https://doi.org/
10.1002/ajim.22650.
Garzón-Villalba, X.P., Wu, Y., Ashley, C.D.,
& Bernard, T.E. (2017). Ability to
Discriminate Between Sustainable and
Unsustainable Heat Stress Exposures—
Part 1: WBGT Exposure Limits. Annals
of Work Exposures and Health, 61(6),
611–620. https://doi.org/10.1093/
annweh/wxx034.
Gauer, R., & Meyers, B.K. (2019). Heat-related
illnesses. American Family Physician,
99(8), 482–489.
Gessel, T., & Lin, C.Y. (2020). Exertional
Heatstroke in a Marathon Runner
Complicated by Concurrent Use of an
Antipsychotic Medication Affecting
Thermoregulation. Clinical Journal of
Sport Medicine, 30(5), e166–e168.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JSM.
0000000000000750.
Gibson, T.M., & Allan, J.R. (1979). Effect on
performance of cycling deep body
temperature between 37.0 and 37.6 C.
Aviation, Space, and Environmental
Medicine, 50(9), 935–938.
Gibson, T.M., Lawson, C.J., Green, R.G., &
Allan, J.R. (1980). Effect of induced
cyclic changes of deep body temperature
on performance of a flight simulator.
Aviation, Space, and Environmental
Medicine, 51(4), 356–360.
Gittleman, M., & Pierce, B. (2013). How
Prevalent is Performance-Related Pay in
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the United States? Current Incidence and
Recent Trends. National Institute
Economic Review, 226, R4–R16. https://
doi.org/10.1177/002795011322600102.
Glaser, J., Hansson, E., Weiss, I., Wesseling,
C., Jakobsson, K., Ekström, U., Apelqvist,
J., Lucas, R., Arias Monge, E., Peraza, S.,
Hogstedt, C., & Wegman, D. H. (2020).
Preventing kidney injury among
sugarcane workers: Promising evidence
from enhanced workplace interventions.
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 77(8), 527–534. https://
doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020-106406.
Glaser, J., Wegman, D.H., Arias-Monge, E.,
Pacheco-Zenteno, F., Prince, H.,
Chavarria, D., Martinez-Cuadra, W. J.,
Jakobsson, K., Hansson, E., Lucas, R. A.
I., Weiss, I., & Wesseling, C. (2022).
Workplace Intervention for Heat Stress:
Essential Elements of Design,
Implementation, and Assessment.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 19(7),
Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph
19073779.
Goodman, A., Klitzman, S., Lau, S., Surick,
I., Schultz, S., Myers, W., Dawson, J.,
Smith, J., Timperi, R., & Grady, G. (1990).
Exertional Rhabdomyolysis and Acute
Renal Impairment—New York City and
Massachusetts 1988. Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR),
39(42), 751–756.
Government Accountability Office (GAO).
(2009). Enhancing OSHA’s Records
Audit Process Could Improve the
Accuracy of Worker Injury and Illness
Data (GAO 10–10; Report to
Congressional Requesters). United States
Government Accountability Office.
www.gao.gov/pdf/product/new-itemsd1010.
Goyal, A., Daneshpajouhnejad, P., Hashmi,
M.F., & Bashir, K. (2023). Acute Kidney
Injury. In StatPearls. StatPearls
Publishing. https://www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK441896/.
Graff Zivin, J., Hsiang, S.M., & Neidell, M.
(2018). Temperature and Human Capital
in the Short and Long Run. Journal of the
Association of Environmental and
Resource Economists, 5(1), 77–105.
https://doi.org/10.1086/694177.
Graff Zivin, J., & Neidell, M. (2012). The
Impact of Pollution on Worker
Productivity. American Economic
Review, 102(7), 3652–3673. https://
doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.7.3652.
Graff Zivin, J., & Neidell, M. (2014).
Temperature and the Allocation of Time:
Implications for Climate Change. Journal
of Labor Economics, 32(1), 1–26. https://
doi.org/10.1086/671766.
Graff Zivin, J., Song, Y., Tang, Q., & Zhang,
P. (2020). Temperature and high-stakes
cognitive performance: Evidence from
the national college entrance
examination in China. Journal of
Environmental Economics and
Management, 104, 102365. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2020.102365.
Grandjean, A.C., & Grandjean, N.R. (2007).
Dehydration and Cognitive Performance.
Journal of the American College of
Nutrition, 26(sup5), 549S–554S. https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:41 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2007.
10719657.
Grant, R.T., & Holling, H. E. (1938). Further
observations on the vascular responses of
the human limb to body warming;
evidence for sympathetic vasodilator
nerves in the normal subject. Clin Sci,
3(3), 273–285.
Groenewold, M.R., & Baron, S. L. (2013). The
Proportion of Work-Related Emergency
Department Visits Not Expected to Be
Paid by Workers’ Compensation:
Implications for Occupational Health
Surveillance, Research, Policy, and
Health Equity. Health Services Research,
48(6pt1), 1939–1959. https://doi.org/
10.1111/1475-6773.12066.
Guam Governor’s Office. (2024). 2024
Executive Budget Request. https://
bbmr.guam.gov/wp-bbmr-content/
uploads/2023/01/FY2024-EXECUTIVEBUDGET-REQUEST-E-VIEWCompressed.pdf.
Gubernot, D. (2015). Occupational HeatRelated Mortality in the United States,
2000–2010: Epidemiology and Policy
Recommendations [The Milken Institute
School of Public Health of The George
Washington University]. https://
scholarspace.library.gwu.edu/concern/
gw_etds/sf268523f?locale=en.
Gubernot, D.M., Anderson, G.B., & Hunting,
K.L. (2015). Characterizing occupational
heat-related mortality in the United
States, 2000–2010: An analysis using the
census of fatal occupational injuries
database. American Journal of Industrial
Medicine, 58(2), 203–211. https://
doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22381.
Gun, R.T., & Budd, G.M. (1995). Effects of
thermal, personal and behavioural
factors on the physiological strain,
thermal comfort and productivity of
Australian shearers in hot weather.
Ergonomics, 38(7), 1368–1384. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00140139508925195.
Guzman, G., & Kollar, M. (2023). Income in
the United States: 2022 (P60–279;
Current Population Reports). U.S.
Government Publishing Office.
Hales, C.M., Kohen, D., Servias, J., & Martin,
C.B. (2019). Prescription Drug Use
Among Adults Aged 40–79 in the United
States and Canada. NCHS Data Brief,
347.
Hancock, P.A., & Vasmatzidis, I. (1998).
Human occupational and performance
limits under stress: The thermal
environment as a prototypical example.
Ergonomics, 41(8), 1169–1191. https://
doi.org/10.1080/001401398186469.
Hancock, P.A., & Vasmatzidis, I. (2003).
Effects of heat stress on cognitive
performance: The current state of
knowledge. International Journal of
Hyperthermia, 19(3), 355–372. https://
doi.org/10.1080/0265673021000054630.
Hanna, A.S. (2004). The Effect of
Temperature on Productivity. National
Electrical Contractors Association
(NECA).
Hansson, E., Glaser, J., Jakobsson, K., Weiss,
I., Wesseling, C., Lucas, R.A.I., Wei,
J.L.K., Ekström, U., Wijkström, J., Bodin,
T., Johnson, R.J., & Wegman, D.H. (2020).
Pathophysiological Mechanisms by
PO 00000
Frm 00357
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71053
which Heat Stress Potentially Induces
Kidney Inflammation and Chronic
Kidney Disease in Sugarcane Workers.
Nutrients, 12(6), 1639. https://doi.org/
10.3390/nu12061639.
Hansson, E., Jakobsson, K., Glaser, J.,
Wesseling, C., Chavarria, D., Lucas,
R.A.I., Prince, H., & Wegman, D.H.
(2024). Impact of heat and a rest-shadehydration intervention program on
productivity of piece-paid industrial
agricultural workers at risk of chronic
kidney disease of nontraditional origin.
Annals of Work Exposures and Health,
68(4), 366–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/
annweh/wxae007.
Harduar Morano, L. (2016). Ambient Outdoor
Heat and Heat-related Illness in Florida
[The University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill University Libraries]. https://
doi.org/10.17615/3STE-T186.
Harduar Morano, L. (2023). Communication
with Laurel Harduar Morano on October
18, 2023.
Harduar Morano, L., Bunn, T.L., Lackovic,
M., Lavender, A., Dang, G.T.T.,
Chalmers, J.J., Li, Y., Zhang, L., &
Flammia, D.D. (2015). Occupational
heat-related illness emergency
department visits and inpatient
hospitalizations in the southeast region,
2007–2011. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 58(10), 1114–1125.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22504.
Harduar Morano, L., & Waller, A. E. (2017).
Evaluation of the Components of the
North Carolina Syndromic Surveillance
System Heat Syndrome Case Definition.
Public Health Reports, 132(1), 40S–47S.
https://doi.org/10.1177/
0033354917710946.
Harduar Morano, L., & Watkins, S. (2017).
Evaluation of Diagnostic Codes in
Morbidity and Mortality Data Sources for
Heat-Related Illness Surveillance. Public
Health Reports, 132(3), 326–335. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0033354917699826.
Harduar Morano, L., Watkins, S., & Kintziger,
K. (2016). A Comprehensive Evaluation
of the Burden of Heat-Related Illness and
Death within the Florida Population.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 13(6), 551.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13060551.
Hart, G., Anderson, R., Crumpler, C.,
Shulkin, A., Reed, G., & Knochel, J.
(1982). Epidemic classical heat stroke:
Clinical characteristics and course of 28
patients. Medicine, 61(3).
Havenith, G., Coenen, J.M.L., Kistemaker, L.,
& Kenney, W.L. (1998). Relevance of
individual characteristics for human heat
stress response is dependent on exercise
intensity and climate type. European
Journal of Applied Physiology, 77(3),
231–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s004210050327.
Heal, G., & Park, J. (2013). Feeling the Heat:
Temperature, Physiology & the Wealth of
Nations [Working paper]. National
Bureau of Economic Research.
Heal, G., & Park, J. (2016). Reflections—
Temperature Stress and the Direct
Impact of Climate Change: A Review of
an Emerging Literature. Review of
Environmental Economics and Policy,
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71054
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
10(2), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1093/
reep/rew007.
Heiden Associates, Inc. (1989). A Study of
Industry Compliance Costs Under the
Final Comprehensive Assessment
Information Rule.
Heinzerling, A., Laws, R.L., Frederick, M.,
Jackson, R., Windham, G., Materna, B., &
Harrison, R. (2020). Risk factors for
occupational heat-related illness among
California workers, 2000–2017.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
63(12), 1145–1154. https://doi.org/
10.1002/ajim.23191.
Heled, Y., Moran, D.S., Mendel, L., Laor, A.,
Pras, E., & Shapiro, Y. (2004). Human
ACE I/D polymorphism is associated
with individual differences in exercise
heat tolerance. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 97(1), 72–76. https://doi.org/
10.1152/japplphysiol.01087.2003.
Hemp, P. (2004). Presenteeism: At work—but
out of it. Harvard Business Review,
82(10), 49–58, 155.
Hendrie, A.L., Brotherhood, J.R., Budd, G.M.,
Jeffery, S.E., Beasley, F.A., Costin, B.P.,
Zhien, W., Baker, M.M., Cheney, N.P., &
Dawson, M.P. (1997). Project Aquarius 8.
Sweating, drinking, and dehydration in
men suppressing wildland fires.
International Journal of Wildland Fire,
7(2), 145–158.
Hesketh, M., Wuellner, S., Robinson, A.,
Adams, D., Smith, C., & Bonauto, D.
(2020). Heat related illness among
workers in Washington State: A
descriptive study using workers’
compensation claims, 2006-2017.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
63(4), 300–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ajim.23092.
Heung, M., Steffick, D.E., Zivin, K., Gillespie,
B.W., Banerjee, T., Hsu, C., Powe, N.R.,
Pavkov, M.E., Williams, D.E., Saran, R.,
Shahinian, V.B., Saran, R., Li, Y., BraggGresham, J., Shahinian, V., Morgenstern,
H., Heung, M., Steffick, D., Tilea, A., . . .
Waller, L. (2016). Acute Kidney Injury
Recovery Pattern and Subsequent Risk of
CKD: An Analysis of Veterans Health
Administration Data. American Journal
of Kidney Diseases, 67(5), 742–752.
https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.
2015.10.019.
Heutel, G., Miller, N.H., & Molitor, D. (2021).
Adaptation and the mortality effects of
temperature across US climate regions.
Review of Economics and Statistics,
103(4), 740–753.
Hill, O.T., Wahi, M.M., Carter, R., Kay, A.B.,
Mckinnon, C.J., & Wallace, R.F. (2012).
Rhabdomyolysis in the US Active Duty
Army, 2004–2006. Medicine & Science in
Sports & Exercise, 44(3), 442–449.
https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0b013e3182312745.
Hirsch, B., Jahn, E.J., & Schnabel, C. (2018).
Do employers have more monopsony
power in slack labor markets?. ILR
Review, 71(3), 676–704.
Hirsch, B.T., Macpherson, D.A., & Even, W.E.
(n.d.). Union Membership, Coverage,
Density and Employment by State and
Sector: 1983–2023. https://
unionstats.com/state/xls/state_1983_
2023.xlsx.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Hirsch, J.A., Nicola, G., McGinty, G., Liu,
R.W., Barr, R. M., Chittle, M.D., &
Manchikanti, L. (2016). ICD–10: History
and Context. American Journal of
Neuroradiology, 37(4), 596–599. https://
doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4696.
Holmes, N.A., Miller, V.S., Schneider, J.,
Hasan, O., & Bates, G.P. (2011). Plasma
Sodium Levels and Dietary Sodium
Intake in Manual Workers in the Middle
East. The Annals of Occupational
Hygiene, 55(4), 397–402. https://doi.org/
10.1093/annhyg/mer004.
Holtzhausen, L.-M., Noakes, T.D., Kroning,
B., De Klerk, M., Roberts, M., & Emsley,
R. (1994). Clinical and biochemical
characteristics of collapsed ultramarathon runners.
Holzle, E., & Kligman, A.M. (1978). The
pathogenesis of miliaria rubra: Role of
the Resident Microflora. British Journal
of Dermatology, 99(2), 117–137. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.
1978.tb01973.x
Hooker, T., & Baker, J. (2023, June 23).
‘‘We’re trapped in these trucks all day’’:
US Postal Service carrier. 25 News.
www.kxxv.com/were-trapped-in-thesetrucks-all-day-us-postal-service-carrier.
Hope, A., & Tyssebotn, I. (1983). The Effect
of Water Deprivation on Local Renal
Blood Flow and Filtration in the
laboratory rat. Circulatory Shock, 11(2),
175–186.
Horn, G.P., Blevins, S., Fernhall, B., & Smith,
D.L. (2013). Core temperature and heart
rate response to repeated bouts of
firefighting activities. Ergonomics, 56(9),
1465–1473. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00140139.2013.818719.
Horswill, C.A., Stofan, J.R., Lacambra, M.,
Toriscelli, T.A., Eichner, E.R., & Murray,
R. (2009). Sodium Balance During U.S.
Football Training in the Heat: CrampProne vs. Reference Players.
International Journal of Sports Medicine,
30(11), 789–794. https://doi.org/10.1055/
s-0029-1234056.
Hostler, D., Reis, S.E., Bednez, J.C., Kerin, S.,
& Suyama, J. (2010). Comparison of
Active Cooling Devices with Passive
Cooling for Rehabilitation of Firefighters
Performing Exercise in Thermal
Protective Clothing: A Report from the
Fireground Rehab Evaluation (FIRE)
Trial. Prehospital Emergency Care, 14(3),
300–309. https://doi.org/10.3109/
10903121003770654.
Hough, T., & Ballantyne, B.L. (1899).
Preliminary note on the effects of
changes in external temperature on the
circulation of blood in the skin. Journal.
Boston Society of Medical Sciences,
3(12), 330–334.
Howe, A.S., & Boden, B.P. (2007). HeatRelated Illness in Athletes. The
American Journal of Sports Medicine,
35(8), 1384–1395. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0363546507305013.
Hsiang, S.M. (2010). Temperatures and
cyclones strongly associated with
economic production in the Caribbean
and Central America. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 107(35),
15367–15372. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1009510107.
PO 00000
Frm 00358
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Hsu, R.K., & Hsu, C. (2016). The Role of
Acute Kidney Injury in Chronic Kidney
Disease. Seminars in Nephrology, 36(4),
283–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.semnephrol.2016.05.005.
Human Performance Resources by
Consortium for Health and Military
Performance (HPRC). (2023). Warrior
heat- and exertion-related events
collaborative. https://www.hprconline.org/resources-partners/whec.
Hunt, P.R., Hackman, H., Berenholz, G.,
McKeown, L., Davis, L., & Ozonoff, V.
(2007). Completeness and accuracy of
International Classification of Disease
(ICD) external cause of injury codes in
emergency department electronic data.
Injury Prevention, 13(6), 422–425.
https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2007.015859.
Hur, P., Park, K., Rosengren, K.S., Horn, G.P.,
& Hsiao-Wecksler, E.T. (2015). Effects of
air bottle design on postural control of
firefighters. Applied Ergonomics, 48, 49–
55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.
2014.11.003.
Hur, P., Rosengren, K.S., Horn, G.P., Smith,
D.L., & Hsiao-Wecksler, E.T. (2013).
Effect of Protective Clothing and Fatigue
on Functional Balance of Firefighters.
Journal of Ergonomics, S2(2). https://
doi.org/10.4172/2165-7556.S2-004.
Iba, T., Connors, J.M., Levi, M., & Levy, J.H.
(2022). Heatstroke-induced
coagulopathy: Biomarkers, mechanistic
insights, and patient management.
EClinicalMedicine, 44, 101276. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101276.
Iglesias-Rios, L., Valentı́n-Cortés, M.,
Fleming, P.J., O’Neill, M.S., & Handal,
A.J. (2023). The Michigan Farmworker
Project: A Community-Based
Participatory Approach to Research on
Precarious Employment and Labor
Exploitation of Farmworkers. Labor
Studies Journal, 48(4), 336–362. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0160449X231196227.
Igloo Products Corp. (2024). Igloo Coolers—
10 Gallon Seat Top Water Jug with Cup
Dispenser. Igloocoolers.com.
Inaba, R., & Mirbod, S.M. (2007). Comparison
of Subjective Symptoms and Hot
Prevention Measures in Summer
between Traffic Control Workers and
Construction Workers in Japan.
Industrial Health, 45(1), 91–99. https://
doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.45.91.
International Labour Organization (ILO).
(2019). Working on a Warmer Planet:
The Impact of Heat Stress on Labour
Productivity and Decent Work.
International Labour Office.
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO). (2017).
Ergonomics of the thermal
environment—Assessment of heat stress
using the WBGT (wet bulb globe
temperature) index. Third Edition. ISO
7243:2017(E). 2017. https://www.iso.org/
standard/67188.html.
Ioannou, L. (2024, April 27). Communication
with Leonidas Ioannou on April 27, 2024
[Personal communication].
Ioannou, L.G., Foster, J., Morris, N.B., Piil,
J.F., Havenith, G., Mekjavic, I.B., Kenny,
G.P., Nybo, L., & Flouris, A.D. (2022).
Occupational heat strain in outdoor
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
workers: A comprehensive review and
meta-analysis. Temperature, 9(1), 67–
102. https://doi.org/10.1080/23328940.
2022.2030634.
Ioannou, L.G., Mantzios, K., Tsoutsoubi, L.,
Nintou, E., Vliora, M., Gkiata, P., Dallas,
C.N., Gkikas, G., Agaliotis, G.,
Sfakianakis, K., Kapnia, A.K., Testa, D.J.,
Amorim, T., Dinas, P.C., Mayor, T.S.,
Gao, C., Nybo, L., & Flouris, A.D.
(2021a). Occupational Heat Stress: MultiCountry Observations and Interventions.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 18(12),
6303. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph18126303.
Ioannou, L.G., Tsoutsoubi, L., Mantzios, K.,
Gkikas, G., Piil, J.F., Dinas, P.C., Notley,
S.R., Kenny, G.P., Nybo, L., & Flouris,
A.D. (2021b). The Impacts of Sun
Exposure on Worker Physiology and
Cognition: Multi-Country Evidence and
Interventions. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public
Health, 18(14), 7698. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph18147698.
Ioannou, L.G., Tsoutsoubi, L., Samoutis, G.,
Bogataj, L.K., Kenny, G.P., Nybo, L.,
Kjellstrom, T., & Flouris, A.D. (2017).
Time-motion analysis as a novel
approach for evaluating the impact of
environmental heat exposure on labor
loss in agriculture workers. Temperature,
4(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/
23328940.2017.1338210.
Ireland, A., Johnston, D., & Knott, R. (2024).
Impacts of Extreme Heat on Labor Force
Dynamics. Centre for Health Economics,
Monash Business School.
Isen, A., Rossin-Slater, M., & Walker, R.
(2017). Relationship between season of
birth, temperature exposure, and later
life wellbeing. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 114(51),
13447–13452. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1702436114.
Ishani, A., Xue, J.L., Himmelfarb, J., Eggers,
P.W., Kimmel, P.L., Molitoris, B.A., &
Collins, A.J. (2009). Acute Kidney Injury
Increases Risk of ESRD among Elderly.
Journal of the American Society of
Nephrology, 20(1), 223–228. https://
doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2007080837.
Jacklitsch, B.L., King, K.A., Vidourek, R.A., &
Merianos, A.L. (2018). Heat-Related
Training and Educational Material Needs
among Oil Spill Cleanup Responders.
Environmental Health Insights, 12,
117863021880229. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1178630218802295.
Jackson, L.L., & Rosenberg, H.R. (2010).
Preventing Heat-Related Illness Among
Agricultural Workers. Journal of
Agromedicine, 15(3), 200–215. https://
doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2010.487021.
Jansen, P.H.P., Gabreëls, F.J.M., & Van
Engelen, B.G.M. (2002). Diagnosis and
Differential Diagnosis of Muscle Cramps:
A Clinical Approach: Journal of Clinical
Neuromuscular Disease, 4(2), 89–94.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00131402200212000-00008.
Jay, O., Cramer, M.N., Ravanelli, N.M., &
Hodder, S.G. (2015). Should electric fans
be used during a heat wave? Applied
Ergonomics, 46, 137–143. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.07.013.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Jay, O., Hoelzl, R., Weets, J., Morris, N.,
English, T., Nybo, L., Niu, J., de Dear, R.,
& Capon, A. (2019). Fanning as an
alternative to air conditioning—A
sustainable solution for reducing indoor
occupational heat stress. Energy and
Buildings, 193, 92–98. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.03.037.
Jessoe, K., Manning, D.T., & Taylor, J.E.
(2018). Climate Change and Labour
Allocation in Rural Mexico: Evidence
from Annual Fluctuations in Weather.
The Economic Journal, 128(608), 230–
261. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12448.
Jimenez, C., Melin, B., Koulmann, N.,
Allevard, A.M., Launay, J.C., & Savourey,
G. (1999). Plasma volume changes during
and after acute variations of body
hydration level in humans. European
Journal of Applied Physiology, 80, 1–8.
J.J. Keller and Associates Inc. (2022). J.J.
Keller Center for Market Insight Pulse
Poll (August 2022).
Joblist. (2022, July 5). Survey: Do you know
how to take a break from work?
Joblist.Com. https://www.joblist.com/
trends/survey-taking-breaks-from-work.
Joe, L., Roisman, R., Beckman, S., Jones, M.,
Beckman, J., Frederick, M., & Harrison,
R. (2014). Using multiple data sets for
public health tracking of work-related
injuries and illnesses in California.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
57(10), 1110–1119. https://doi.org/
10.1002/ajim.22361.
Johansson, B., Rask, K., & Stenberg, M.
(2010). Piece rates and their effects on
health and safety—A literature review.
Applied Ergonomics, 41(4), 607–614.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.
2009.12.020.
Johnson, R.J., Wesseling, C., & Newman, L.S.
(2019). Chronic Kidney Disease of
Unknown Cause in Agricultural
Communities. New England Journal of
Medicine, 380(19), 1843–1852. https://
doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1813869.
Junglee, N.A., Di Felice, U., Dolci, A., Fortes,
M.B., Jibani, M.M., Lemmey, A.B.,
Walsh, N.P., & Macdonald, J.H. (2013).
Exercising in a hot environment with
muscle damage: Effects on acute kidney
injury biomarkers and kidney function.
American Journal of Physiology-Renal
Physiology, 305(6), F813–F820. https://
doi.org/10.1152/ajprenal.00091.2013.
Jurewicz, J., Radwan, M., Sobala, W.,
Radwan, P., Bochenek, M., & Hanke, W.
(2014). Effects of occupational
exposure—Is there a link between
exposure based on an occupational
questionnaire and semen quality?
Systems Biology in Reproductive
Medicine, 60(4), 227–233. https://
doi.org/10.3109/19396368.2014.907837.
Justia. (2022). Meal and Rest Break Laws in
Employment: 50-State Survey. https://
www.justia.com/employment/
employment-laws-50-state-surveys/mealand-rest-break-laws-in-the-workplace-50state-survey/.
Kahn, M.E. (2016). The Climate Change
Adaptation Literature. Review of
Environmental Economics and Policy,
10(1), 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1093/
reep/rev023.
PO 00000
Frm 00359
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71055
Kaltsatou, A., Flouris, A.D., Herry, C.L.,
Notley, S.R., Macartney, M.J., Seely,
A.J.E., & Kenny, G.P. (2020). Heart rate
variability in older workers during work
under the Threshold Limit Values for
heat exposure. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 63(9), 787–795.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23156.
Kaltsatou, A., Notley, S.R., Flouris, A.D., &
Kenny, G.P. (2021). An exploratory
survey of heat stress management
programs in the electric power industry.
Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 18(9), 436–445.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2021.
1954187.
Kamijo, Y., & Nose, H. (2006). Heat Illness
during Working and Preventive
Considerations from Body Fluid
Homeostasis. Industrial Health, 44(3),
345–358. https://doi.org/10.2486/
indhealth.44.345.
Kamijo, Y.-I., Lee, K., & Mack, G.W. (2005).
Active cutaneous vasodilation in resting
humans during mild heat stress. Journal
of Applied Physiology, 98(3), 829–837.
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.
00235.2004.
Karasick, A.S., Thomas, R.J., Cannon, D.L.,
Fagan, K.M., Bray, P.A., Hodgson, M.J.,
& Tustin, A.W. (2020). Notes from the
Field: Amphetamine Use Among
Workers with Severe Hyperthermia—
Eight States, 2010–2019. MMWR.
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,
69(30), 1004–1005. https://doi.org/
10.15585/mmwr.mm6930a5.
Karthick, S., Kermanshachi, S., &
Pamidimukkala, A. (2023). Analysis of
the Health and Safety Challenges Faced
by Construction Workers in Extreme Hot
Weather Conditions. Journal of Legal
Affairs and Dispute Resolution in
Engineering and Construction, 15(1),
04522048. https://doi.org/10.1061/
JLADAH.LADR-882.
Karvatte, N., Klosowski, E.S., de Almeida,
R.G., Mesquita, E.E., de Oliveira, C.C., &
Alves, F.V. (2016). Shading effect on
microclimate and thermal comfort
indexes in integrated crop-livestockforest systems in the Brazilian Midwest.
International Journal of Biometeorology,
60(12), 1933–1941. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00484-016-1180-5.
Karvatte, N., Miyagi, E.S., Carvalho de
Oliveira, C., Mastelaro, A.P., de Aguiar
Coelho, F., Bayma, G., Bungenstab, D.J.,
& Alves, F.V. (2021). Spatiotemporal
variations on infrared temperature as a
thermal comfort indicator for cattle
under agroforestry systems. Journal of
Thermal Biology, 97, 102871. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2021.102871.
Kazman, J.B., Attipoe, S., Kupchak, B.R., &
Deuster, P.A. (2020). Caffeine and heat
have additive but not interactive effects
on physiologic strain: A factorial
experiment. Journal of Thermal Biology,
89, 102563. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jtherbio.2020.102563.
KDIGO. (2012). Kidney Disease: Improving
Global Outcomes (KDIGO). KDIGO
Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute
Kidney Injury, 2(1), 1. https://doi.org/
10.1038/kisup.2012.1.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71056
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Kearney, G.D., Hu, H., Xu, X., Hall, M.B., &
Balanay, J.A.G. (2016). Estimating the
Prevalence of Heat-Related Symptoms
and Sun Safety–Related Behavior among
Latino Farmworkers in Eastern North
Carolina. Journal of Agromedicine, 21(1),
15–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1059924X.2015.1106377.
Kellogg, D.L., Pérgola, P.E., Piest, K.L.,
Kosiba, W.A., Crandall, C.G., Grossmann,
M., & Johnson, J.M. (1995). Cutaneous
Active Vasodilation in Humans Is
Mediated by Cholinergic Nerve
Cotransmission. Circulation Research,
77(6), 1222–1228. https://doi.org/
10.1161/01.RES.77.6.1222.
Kenny, G.P., Poirier, M.P., Metsios, G.S.,
Boulay, P., Dervis, S., Friesen, B.J.,
Malcolm, J., Sigal, R.J., Seely, A.J.E., &
Flouris, A.D. (2017). Hyperthermia and
cardiovascular strain during an extreme
heat exposure in young versus older
adults. Temperature, 4(1), 79–88. https://
doi.org/10.1080/23328940.2016.1230171.
Kenny, G.P., Sigal, R.J., & McGinn, R. (2016).
Body temperature regulation in diabetes.
Temperature, 3(1), 119–145. https://
doi.org/10.1080/23328940.2015.1131506.
Kenny, G.P., Wilson, T.E., Flouris, A.D., &
Fujii, N. (2018). Heat exhaustion. In
Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Vol.
157, pp. 505–529). Elsevier. https://
doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-640741.00031-8.
Kenny, G.P., Yardley, J., Brown, C., Sigal,
R.J., & Jay, O. (2010). Heat stress in older
individuals and patients with common
chronic diseases. Canadian Medical
Association Journal, 182(10), 1053–1060.
https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.081050.
Kerstein, M.D., Wright, D., Connelly, J., &
Hubbard, R. (1986). Heat Illness in Hot/
Humid Environment. Military Medicine,
151(6), 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/
milmed/151.6.308.
Kestrel Instruments. (2024). Kestrel Drop D2
Wireless Temperature & Humidity Data
Logger. Kestrelinstruments.com.
Khan, F.Y. (2009). Rhabdomyolysis: A review
of the literature. The Netherlands Journal
of Medicine, 67(9), 272–283.
Khogali, M. (1997). Heat Illness Alert
Program: Practical Implications for
Management and Prevention. Annals of
the New York Academy of Sciences,
813(1), 526–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1749-6632.1997.tb51742.x.
Khogali, M., & Weiner, J. (1980). Heat Stroke:
Report on 18 Cases. The Lancet, 276–
278.
Kiatkitroj, K., Arphorn, S., Tangtong, C.,
Maruo, S.J., & Ishimaru, T. (2021). Risk
factors associated with heat-related
illness among sugarcane farmers in
Thailand. Industrial Health, 60(5), 447–
458. https://doi.org/10.2486/
indhealth.2021-0161.
Kim, J., Lee, J., Kim, S., Ryu, H.Y., Cha, K.S.,
& Sung, D. J. (2016). Exercise-induced
rhabdomyolysis mechanisms and
prevention: A literature review. Journal
of Sport and Health Science, 5(3), 324–
333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2015.
01.012.
King, M.A., Leon, L.R., Mustico, D.L., Haines,
J.M., & Clanton, T.L. (2015). Biomarkers
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
of multiorgan injury in a preclinical
model of exertional heat stroke. Journal
of Applied Physiology, 118(10), 1207–
1220. https://doi.org/10.1152/
japplphysiol.01051.2014.
Kiyatkin, E.A., & Sharma, H.S. (2009). Acute
Methamphetamine Intoxication: Brain
hyperthermia, blood-brain barrier and
brain edema. In International Review of
Neurobiology (Vol. 88, pp. 65–100).
Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S00747742(09)88004-5.
Kjellstrom, T., Freyberg, C., Lemke, B., Otto,
M., & Briggs, D. (2018). Estimating
population heat exposure and impacts
on working people in conjunction with
climate change. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 62(3), 291–306. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00484-017-1407-0.
Kjellstrom, T., Holmer, I., & Lemke, B.
(2009a). Workplace heat stress, health
and productivity—an increasing
challenge for low and middle-income
countries during climate change. Global
Health Action, 2(1), 2047. https://
doi.org/10.3402/gha.v2i0.2047.
Kjellstrom, T., Kovats, R.S., Lloyd, S.J., Holt,
T., & Tol, R.S.J. (2009b). The Direct
Impact of Climate Change on Regional
Labor Productivity. Archives of
Environmental & Occupational Health,
64(4), 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19338240903352776.
Kjellstrom, T., Lemke, B., Otto, M., Hyatt, O.,
& Dear, K. (2014). Occupational Heat
Stress (2014:4). Health and Environment
International Trust. https://
climatechip.org/sites/default/files/
publications/TP2014_4_Occupational_
Heat_Stress_WHO.pdf.
Klok, L., Rood, N., Kluck, J., & Kleerekoper,
L. (2019). Assessment of thermally
comfortable urban spaces in Amsterdam
during hot summer days. International
Journal of Biometeorology, 63(2), 129–
141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-0181644-x.
Knapik, J.J., Canham-Chervak, M., Hauret, K.,
Laurin, M.J., Hoedebecke, E., Craig, S., &
Montain, S. J. (2002). Seasonal Variations
in Injury Rates During U.S. Army Basic
Combat Training. The Annals of
Occupational Hygiene. https://doi.org/
10.1093/annhyg/mef013.
Kniesner, T.J., Viscusi, W.K., Woock, C., &
Ziliak, J.P. (2012). The value of a
statistical life: Evidence from panel data.
Review of Economics and Statistics,
94(1), 74–87.
Knochel, J.P., & Schlein, E.M. (1972). On the
mechanism of rhabdomyolysis in
potassium depletion. Journal of Clinical
Investigation, 51(7), 1750–1758. https://
doi.org/10.1172/JCI106976.
Knowlton, K., Rotkin-Ellman, M., King, G.,
Margolis, H.G., Smith, D., Solomon, G.,
Trent, R., & English, P. (2009). The 2006
California Heat Wave: Impacts on
Hospitalizations and Emergency
Department Visits. Environmental
Health Perspectives, 117(1), 61–67.
https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11594.
Kodadek, L., Carmichael, S.P., Seshadri, A.,
Pathak, A., Hoth, J., Appelbaum, R.,
Michetti, C.P., & Gonzalez, R.P. (2022).
Rhabdomyolysis: An American
PO 00000
Frm 00360
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Association for the Surgery of Trauma
Critical Care Committee Clinical
Consensus Document. Trauma Surgery &
Acute Care Open, 7(1), e000836. https://
doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2021-000836.
Koh, D. (1995). An outbreak of occupational
dermatosis in an electronics store.
Contact Dermatitis, 32(6), 327–330.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.16000536.1995.tb00620.x
Korey Stringer Institute. (n.d.).
Hyponatremia. Retrieved February 5,
2024, from https://ksi.uconn.edu/
emergency-conditions/hyponatremia/.
Krishnamurthy, M., Ramalingam, P.,
Perumal, K., Kamalakannan, L.P.,
Chinnadurai, J., Shanmugam, R.,
Srinivasan, K., & Venugopal, V. (2017).
Occupational Heat Stress Impacts on
Health and Productivity in a Steel
Industry in Southern India. Safety and
Health at Work, 8(1), 99–104. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2016.08.005.
Kuehn, L., & McCormick, S. (2017). Heat
Exposure and Maternal Health in the
Face of Climate Change. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 14(8), 853. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph14080853.
Kupferman, J., Ramı́rez-Rubio, O., Amador,
J.J., López-Pilarte, D., Wilker, E.H., Laws,
R.L., Sennett, C., Robles, N.V., Lau, J.L.,
Salinas, A.J., Kaufman, J.S., Weiner, D.E.,
Scammell, M.K., McClean, M.D., Brooks,
D.R., & Friedman, D.J. (2018). Acute
Kidney Injury in Sugarcane Workers at
Risk for Mesoamerican Nephropathy.
American Journal of Kidney Diseases,
72(4), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1053/
j.ajkd.2018.04.014.
Kyung, M., Lee, S.J., Dancu, C., & Hong, O.
(2023). Underreporting of workers’
injuries or illnesses and contributing
factors: A systematic review. BMC Public
Health, 23(1), 558. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s12889-023-15487-0.
Lai, W., Qiu, Y., Tang, Q., Xi, C., & Zhang,
P. (2023). The Effects of Temperature on
Labor Productivity. Annual Review of
Resource Economics, 15, 213–232.
Laitano, O., Garcia, C.K., Mattingly, A.J.,
Robinson, G.P., Murray, K.O., King,
M.A., Ingram, B., Ramamoorthy, S.,
Leon, L.R., & Clanton, T.L. (2020).
Delayed metabolic dysfunction in
myocardium following exertional heat
stroke in mice. The Journal of
Physiology, 598(5), 967–985. https://
doi.org/10.1113/JP279310.
Laitano, O., King, M.A., & Leon, L.R. (2019).
Common Misconceptions in Classic and
Exertional Heat Stroke. In Heat Stress in
Sport and Exercise: Thermophysiology of
Health and Performance (pp. 91–112).
Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-935157_5.
Lam, M., Krenz, J., Palmández, P., Negrete,
M., Perla, M., Murphy-Robinson, H., &
Spector, J.T. (2013). Identification of
barriers to the prevention and treatment
of heat-related illness in Latino
farmworkers using activity-oriented,
participatory rural appraisal focus group
methods. BMC Public Health, 13(1),
1004. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-245813-1004.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Lamarche, D.T., Meade, R.D., D’Souza, A.W.,
Flouris, A.D., Hardcastle, S.G., Sigal, R.J.,
Boulay, P., & Kenny, G.P. (2017). The
recommended Threshold Limit Values
for heat exposure fail to maintain body
core temperature within safe limits in
older working adults. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 14(9), 703–711. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2017.1321844.
Langer, C.E., Mitchell, D.C., Armitage, T.L.,
Moyce, S.C., Tancredi, D.J., Castro, J.,
Vega-Arroyo, A.J., Bennett, D.H., &
Schenker, M.B. (2021). Are Cal/OSHA
Regulations Protecting Farmworkers in
California From Heat-Related Illness?
Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 63(6), 532–539.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.000000
0000002189.
Langkulsen, U., Vichit-Vadakan, N., &
Taptagaporn, S. (2010). Health impact of
climate change on occupational health
and productivity in Thailand. Global
Health Action, 3(1), 5607. https://
doi.org/10.3402/gha.v3i0.5607.
Lavetti, K. (2023). Compensating Wage
Differentials in Labor Markets: Empirical
Challenges and Applications. Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 37(3), 189–212.
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.37.3.189.
Lee, L.S.H., Cheung, P.K., Fung, C.K.W., &
Jim, C.Y. (2020). Improving street
walkability: Biometeorological
assessment of artificial-partial shade
structures in summer sunny conditions.
International Journal of Biometeorology,
64(4), 547–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00484-019-01840-9.
Leibler, J.H., Ramirez-Rubio, O., Velázquez,
J.J.A., Pilarte, D.L., Obeid, W., Parikh,
C.R., Gadupudi, S., Scammell, M.K.,
Friedman, D.J., & Brooks, D.R. (2021).
Biomarkers of kidney injury among
children in a high-risk region for chronic
kidney disease of uncertain etiology.
Pediatric Nephrology, 36(2), 387–396.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-02004595-3.
Leigh, J.P. (2011). Economic Burden of
Occupational Injury and Illness in the
United States: U.S. Economic Burden of
Occupational Injury and Illness. Milbank
Quarterly, 89(4), 728–772. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.
00648.x.
Leon, L.R., & Helwig, B.G. (2010). Heat
stroke: Role of the systemic
inflammatory response. Journal of
Applied Physiology, 109(6), 1980–1988.
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.
00301.2010.
Leon, L.R., & Kenefick, R. (2012). Chapter 10:
Pathophysiology of Heat-Related
Illnesses. In Wilderness Medicine
Textbook (pp. 113–e44).
Lewandowski, S.A., & Shaman, J.L. (2022).
Heat stress morbidity among U.S.
military personnel: Daily exposure and
lagged response (1998–2019).
International Journal of Biometeorology,
66(6), 1199–1208. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00484-022-02269-3.
Li, J., Shen, X., Funk, T.L., & Wang, X. (2018).
Feasibility Study of Environmental
Control of Dairy Barns using Air
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Conditioning or Evaporative Cooling.
10th International Livestock
Environment Symposium (ILES X).
https://doi.org/10.13031/iles.18-144.
Li, M., Ferreira, S., & Smith, T.A. (2020).
Temperature and self-reported mental
health in the United States. PLOS ONE,
15(3), e0230316. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0230316.
Li, X., Chow, K.H., Zhu, Y., & Lin, Y. (2016).
Evaluating the impacts of hightemperature outdoor working
environments on construction labor
productivity in China: A case study of
rebar workers. Building and
Environment, 95, 42–52. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.09.005.
Lieberman, H.R. (2007). Hydration and
Cognition: A Critical Review and
Recommendations for Future Research.
Journal of the American College of
Nutrition, 26(sup5), 555S–561S. https://
doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2007.
10719658.
Lim, C.L., Chung, K.K., & Hock, L.L.K. (1997).
The Effects of Prolonged Passive Heat
Exposure and Basic Military Training on
Thermoregulatory and Cardiovascular
Responses in Recruits from a Tropical
Country. Military Medicine, 162(9), 623–
627. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/
162.9.623.
Lin, N.W., Ramirez-Cardenas, A., Wingate,
K.C., King, B.S., Scott, K., & HaganHayes, K. (2023). Risk factors for heatrelated illness resulting in death or
hospitalization in the oil and gas
extraction industry. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 1(14).
Lind, A., Humphreys, P.W., Collins, K.J.,
Foster, K., & Sweetland, K.F. (1970).
Influence of age and daily duration of
exposure on responses of men to work in
heat. Journal of Applied Physiology,
28(1), 50–56.
Lind, A.R. (1963). Physiological effects of
continuous or intermittent work in the
heat. Journal of Applied Physiology,
18(1), 57–60. https://doi.org/10.1152/
jappl.1963.18.1.57.
Ljungberg, A.-S., Enander, A., & Holmer, I.
(1979). Evaluation of heat stress during
sedentary work. Scandinavian Journal of
Work, Environment & Health, 5(1), 23–
30. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.2669.
Lohaus, D., Habermann, W., & Nachreiner, M.
(2022). Sickness presenteeism explained
by balancing perceived positive and
negative effects. Frontiers in Psychology,
13, 963560. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2022.963560.
LoPalo, M. (2023). Temperature, Worker
Productivity, and Adaptation: Evidence
from Survey Data Production. American
Economic Journal: Applied Economics,
15(1), 192–229. https://doi.org/10.1257/
app.20200547.
Louisiana Department of Health (DOH).
(2023). Heat-Related Illness in Louisiana:
Review of Emergency Department and
Hospitalization Data from 2010–2020.
Louisiana Department of Health. https://
ldh.la.gov/assets/docs/lah/HRI_in_
Louisiana_from_2010-2020.pdf.
Louisiana Department of Health (DOH).
(2024). Heat-Related Emergency
PO 00000
Frm 00361
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71057
Department Visits in Louisiana: Review
of Syndromic Surveillance Data for April
through October 2023. Louisiana
Department of Health. https://ldh.la.gov/
assets/docs/lah/HRI_Syndromic_
Surveillance_Report_2023.pdf.
Lu, I.-C., Yang, C.-C., Huang, C.-H., Chen, S.Y., Lin, C.-W., Lin, C.-H., & Chuang, H.Y. (2022). The Risk Factors for
Radiolucent Nephrolithiasis among
Workers in High-Temperature
Workplaces in the Steel Industry.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 19(23),
15720. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph
192315720.
Luber, G., Sanchez, C., & Conklin, L. (2006).
Heat-related deaths—United States,
1999–2003. MMWR. Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report, 55(29), 796–
798.
Lucas, R.A.I., Epstein, Y., & Kjellstrom, T.
(2014). Excessive occupational heat
exposure: A significant ergonomic
challenge and health risk for current and
future workers. Extreme Physiology &
Medicine, 3(1), 14. https://doi.org/
10.1186/2046-7648-3-14.
Lucas, R.A.I., Sarma, S., Schlader, Z.J.,
Pearson, J., & Crandall, C.G. (2015). Agerelated changes to cardiac systolic and
diastolic function during whole-body
passive hyperthermia. Experimental
Physiology, 100(4), 422–434. https://
doi.org/10.1113/expphysiol.2014.
083014.
Lucas, R.A., Skinner, B.D., Arias-Monge, E.,
Jakobsson, K., Wesseling, C., Weiss, I.,
Poveda, S., Cerda-Granados, F.I., Glaser,
J., Hansson, E., & Wegman, D.H. (2023).
Targeting workload to ameliorate risk of
heat stress in industrial sugarcane
workers. Scandinavian Journal of Work,
Environment & Health, 49(1), 43–52.
https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4057.
Luetmer, M.T., Boettcher, B.J., Franco, J.M.,
Reisner, J.H., Cheville, A.L., & Finnoff,
J.T. (2020). Exertional Rhabdomyolysis:
A Retrospective Population-based Study.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise,
52(3), 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1249/
MSS.0000000000002178.
Luginbuhl, R., Jackson, L., Castillo, D., &
Loringer, K. (2008). Heat-related deaths
among crop workers—United States,
1992—2006. MMWR. Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report, 57(24), 649–
653.
Lugo-Amador, N.M., Rothenhaus, T., &
Moyer, P. (2004). Heat-related illness.
Emergency Medicine Clinics of North
America, 22(2), 315–327. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.emc.2004.01.004.
Luhring, K.E., Butts, C.L., Smith, C.R.,
Bonacci, J.A., Ylanan, R.C., Ganio, M.S.,
& McDermott, B.P. (2016). Cooling
Effectiveness of a Modified Cold-Water
Immersion Method After ExerciseInduced Hyperthermia. Journal of
Athletic Training, 51(11), 946–951.
https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-605051.12.07.
Lui, B., Cuddy, J.S., Hailes, W.S., & Ruby,
B.C. (2014). Seasonal heat
acclimatization in wildland firefighters.
Journal of Thermal Biology, 45, 134–140.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71058
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.
2014.08.009.
Luque, J.S., Becker, A., Bossak, B.H.,
Grzywacz, J.G., Tovar-Aguilar, J.A., &
Guo, Y. (2020). Knowledge and Practices
to Avoid Heat-Related Illness among
Hispanic Farmworkers along the FloridaGeorgia Line. Journal of Agromedicine,
25(2), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1059924X.2019.1670312.
Luque, J.S., Bossak, B.H., Davila, C.B., &
Tovar-Aguilar, J.A. (2019). ‘‘I Think the
Temperature was 110 Degrees!’’: Work
Safety Discussions Among Hispanic
Farmworkers. Journal of Agromedicine,
24(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1059924X.2018.1536572.
Macleod, J., & Hotchkiss, R.S. (1941). The
effect of hyperpyrexia upon spermatozoa
counts in men. Endocrinology, 28(5),
780–784.
Macleod, W.B., & Nakavachara, V. (2007).
Can wrongful discharge law enhance
employment? The Economic Journal,
117(521), F218–F278.
Maline, G.E., & Goldfarb, D.S. (2024). Climate
change and kidney stones. Current
Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension,
33(1), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1097/
MNH.0000000000000931.
Mani, A., Musolin, K., James, K., Kincer, G.,
Alexander, B., Succop, P., Lovett, W.,
Jetter, W.A., & Bhattacharya, A. (2013).
Risk factors associated with live fire
training: Buildup of heat stress and
fatigue, recovery and role of microbreaks. Occupational Ergonomics, 11(2),
109–121. https://doi.org/10.3233/OER130212.
Mann, R., & Schuetz, J. (2022). As extreme
heat grips the globe, access to air
conditioning is an urgent public health
issue. Brookings. https://
www.brookings.edu/articles/as-extremeheat-grips-the-globe-access-to-airconditioning-is-an-urgent-public-healthissue/.
Manspeaker, S., Henderson, K., & Riddle, D.
(2016). Treatment of exertional
rhabdomyolysis in athletes: A systematic
review. JBI Database of Systematic
Reviews and Implementation Reports,
14(6), 117–147. https://doi.org/10.11124/
JBISRIR-2016-001879.
Maricopa County Public Health Department.
(n.d.). Maricopa County Heat Morbidity
Report 2006–2017. https://
www.maricopa.gov/ArchiveCenter/
ViewFile/Item/1373.
Marklund, S., Gustafsson, K., Bergström, G.,
& Leineweber, C. (2021). Reasons for
presenteeism in different occupational
branches in Sweden: A population based
cross-sectional study. International
Archives of Occupational and
Environmental Health, 94(6), 1385–1395.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-02101701-2.
Martı́nez-Solanas, È., López-Ruiz, M.,
Wellenius, G.A., Gasparrini, A., Sunyer,
J., Benavides, F.G., & Basagaña, X.
(2018). Evaluation of the Impact of
Ambient Temperatures on Occupational
Injuries in Spain. Environmental Health
Perspectives, 126(6), 067002. https://
doi.org/10.1289/EHP2590.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Massetti, E., & Mendelsohn, R. (2018).
Measuring Climate Adaptation: Methods
and Evidence. Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy, 12(2), 324–341.
https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rey007.
Masuda, Y.J., Garg, T., Anggraeni, I., Ebi, K.,
Krenz, J., Game, E.T., Wolff, N.H., &
Spector, J.T. (2021). Warming from
tropical deforestation reduces worker
productivity in rural communities.
Nature Communications, 12(1), 1601.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-02121779-z.
Mattke, S., Balakrishnan, A., Bergamo, G., &
Newberry, S.J. (2007). A Review of
Methods to Measure Health-related
Productivity Loss, 13(4).
Maung, Z., & Tustin, A.W. (2020). The Heat
Death Line: Proposed Heat Index Alert
Threshold for Preventing Heat-Related
Fatalities in the Civilian Workforce.
NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of
Environmental and Occupational Health
Policy, 30(2), 138–145. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1048291120933819.
Mazlomi, A., Golbabaei, F., Farhang
Dehghan, S., Abbasinia, M., Mahmoud
Khani, S., Ansari, M., & Hosseini, M.
(2017). The influence of occupational
heat exposure on cognitive performance
and blood level of stress hormones: A
field study report. International Journal
of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics,
23(3), 431–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10803548.2016.1251137.
Mazloumi, A., Golbabaei, F., Mahmood
Khani, S.M.K., Kazemi, Z., Hosseini, M.,
Abbasinia, M., & Farhang Dehghan, S.
(2014). Evaluating Effects of Heat Stress
on Cognitive Function among Workers in
a Hot Industry. Health Promotion
Perspectives; EISSN 2228–6497. https://
doi.org/10.5681/HPP.2014.031.
McCarthy, R.B., Shofer, F.S., & GreenMcKenzie, J. (2019). Outcomes of a Heat
Stress Awareness Program on HeatRelated Illness in Municipal Outdoor
Workers. Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 61(9), 724–728.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000
001639.
McDermott, B.P., Casa, D.J., O’Connor, F.G.,
Adams, W.B., Armstrong, L.E., Brennan,
A.H., Lopez, R.M., Stearns, R.L.,
Troyanos, C., & Yeargin, S.W. (2009a).
Cold-Water Dousing with Ice Massage to
Treat Exertional Heat Stroke: A Case
Series. Aviation, Space, and
Environmental Medicine, 80(8), 720–722.
https://doi.org/10.3357/ASEM.2498.
2009.
McDermott, B.P., Casa, D.J., Ganio, M.S.,
Lopez, R.M., Yeargin, S.W., Armstrong,
L.E., & Maresh, C.M. (2009b). Acute
Whole-Body Cooling for ExerciseInduced Hyperthermia: A Systematic
Review. Journal of Athletic Training,
44(1), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.4085/
1062-6050-44.1.84.
McDermott, B.P., Casa, D.J., Yeargin, S.W.,
Gaino, M.S., Armstrong, L.E., & Maresh,
C.M. (2007). Recovery and Return to
Activity Following Exertional Heat
Stroke: Considerations for the Sports
Medicine Staff. Journal of Sport
Rehabilitation, 16, 163–181.
PO 00000
Frm 00362
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
McDermott, B.P., Smith, C.R., Butts, C.L.,
Caldwell, A.R., Lee, E.C., Vingren, J.L.,
Munoz, C.X., Kunces, L.J., Williamson,
K., Ganio, M.S., & Armstrong, L.E.
(2018). Renal stress and kidney injury
biomarkers in response to endurance
cycling in the heat with and without
ibuprofen. Journal of Science and
Medicine in Sport, 21(12), 1180–1184.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.
05.003.
McInnes, J.A., Akram, M., MacFarlane, E.M.,
Keegel, T., Sim, M.R., & Smith, P. (2017).
Association between high ambient
temperature and acute work-related
injury: A case-crossover analysis using
workers’ compensation claims data.
Scandinavian Journal of Work,
Environment & Health, 43(1), 86–94.
https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3602.
McLellan, T.M., & Selkirk, G.A. (2006). The
Management of Heat Stress for the
Firefighter: A Review of Work
Conducted on Behalf of the Toronto Fire
Service. Industrial Health, 44(3), 414–
426. https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.
44.414.
Meade, R.D., D’Souza, A.W., Krishen, L., &
Kenny, G.P. (2017). The physiological
strain incurred during electrical utilities
work over consecutive work shifts in hot
environments: A case report. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 14(12), 986–994. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2017.1365151.
Meade, R.D., Lauzon, M., Poirier, M.P.,
Flouris, A.D., & Kenny, G.P. (2016a). The
physical demands of electrical utilities
work in North America. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 13(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2015.1077966.
Meade, R.D., Notley, S.R., Kirby, N.V., &
Kenny, G.P. (2024). A critical review of
the effectiveness of electric fans as a
personal cooling intervention in hot
weather and heatwaves. The Lancet
Planetary Health, 8(4), e256–e269.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S25425196(24)00030-5.
Meade, R.D., Poirier, M.P., Flouris, A.D.,
Hardcastle, S.G., & Kenny, G.P. (2016b).
Do the Threshold Limit Values for Work
in Hot Conditions Adequately Protect
Workers? Medicine & Science in Sports
& Exercise, 48(6), 1187–1196. https://
doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000
000886.
Meegahapola, P.A., & Prabodanie, R.A.R.
(2018). Impact of environmental
conditions on workers’ productivity and
health. International Journal of
Workplace Health Management, 11(2),
74–84. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWHM10-2017-0082.
Mekjavic, I.B., Gliha, M., Tobita, K., Ciuha,
U., Tehovnik, D., Casanueva, A., Kingma,
B., Nybo, L., Piil, J.F., Morris, N., Flouris,
A., & Ioannou, L. (n.d.). D3.3: Report on
solutions to mitigate heat stress for
workers of the manufacturing sector.
Methner, M., & Eisenberg, J. (2018).
Evaluation of heat stress and heat strain
among employees working outdoors in
an extremely hot environment. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Hygiene, 15(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2018.1456663.
Middel, A., & Krayenhoff, E.S. (2019).
Micrometeorological determinants of
pedestrian thermal exposure during
record-breaking heat in Tempe, Arizona:
Introducing the MaRTy observational
platform. Science of The Total
Environment, 687, 137–151. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.085.
Mieusset, R., & Bujan, L. (1995). Testicular
heating and its possible contributions to
male infertility: A review. International
Journal of Andrology, 18(4), 169–184.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652605.1995.tb00408.x.
Mieusset, R., Bujan, L., Mondinat, C., Mansat,
A., Pontonnier, F., & Grandjean, H.
(1987). Association of scrotal
hyperthermia with impaired
spermatogenesis in infertile men.
Fertility and Sterility, 48(6), 1006–1011.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S00150282(16)59600-9.
Mihal, C.P. (1981). Effect of heat stress on
physiological factors for industrial
workers performing routine work and
wearing impermeable vapor-barrier
clothing. American Industrial Hygiene
Association Journal, 42(2), 97–103.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1529866819
1419424.
Miller, G. (2008). Hidden Tragedy:
Underreporting of Workplace Injuries
and Illnesses. U.S. House of
Representatives, The Committee on
Education and Labor. https://
www.bls.gov/iif/data-quality-research/
hidden-tragedy-underreporting-ofworkplace-injuries-and-illnesses.pdf.
Minard, D. (1961). Prevention of heat
casualties in Marine Corps recruits.
Period of 1955–60, with comparative
incidence rates and climatic heat stresses
in other training categories. Military
Medicine, 126, 261–272.
Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA). (2012). Heat Stress In Mining
(SM 6; Safety Manual Series). U.S.
Department of Labor, Mine Safety and
Health Administration. https://
www.msha.gov/sites/default/files/Alerts
andHazards/HeatStress.pdf.
Minson, C.T., Wladkowski, S.L., Cardell,
A.F., Pawelczyk, J.A., & Kenney, W.L.
(1998). Age alters the cardiovascular
response to direct passive heating.
Journal of Applied Physiology, 84(4),
1323–1332. https://doi.org/10.1152/
jappl.1998.84.4.1323.
Mirabelli, M.C., Quandt, S.A., Crain, R.,
Grzywacz, J.G., Robinson, E.N., Vallejos,
Q.M., & Arcury, T.A. (2010). Symptoms
of Heat Illness Among Latino Farm
Workers in North Carolina. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 39(5),
468–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.amepre.2010.07.008.
Mirabelli, M.C., & Richardson, D.B. (2005).
Heat-Related Fatalities in North Carolina.
American Journal of Public Health,
95(4).
Mitchell, D.C., Castro, J., Armitage, T.L.,
Tancredi, D.J., Bennett, D.H., &
Schenker, M.B. (2018). Physical activity
and common tasks of California farm
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
workers: California Heat Illness
Prevention Study (CHIPS). Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 15(12), 857–869. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2018.1519319.
Mix, J., Elon, L., Vi Thien Mac, V., Flocks,
J., Economos, E., Tovar-Aguilar, A.J.,
Stover Hertzberg, V., & McCauley, L.A.
(2018). Hydration Status, Kidney
Function, and Kidney Injury in Florida
Agricultural Workers. Journal of
Occupational & Environmental
Medicine, 60(5), e253–e260. https://
doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000
001261.
Miyamoto, M. (1994). Renal Cortical and
Medullary Tissue Blood Flow During
Experimental Hyperthermia in Dogs.
Japan Journal of Hyperthermic Oncology,
10(1), 78–89.
Mizelle, E., Larson, K.L., Bolin, L.P., &
Kearney, G.D. (2022). Fluid Intake and
Hydration Status Among North Carolina
Farmworkers: A Mixed Methods Study.
Workplace Health & Safety, 70(12), 532–
541. https://doi.org/10.1177/216507
99221117273.
Mora, C., Counsell, C.W.W., Bielecki, C.R., &
Louis, L.V. (2017). Twenty-Seven Ways a
Heat Wave Can Kill You: Deadly Heat in
the Era of Climate Change. Circulation:
Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes,
10(11), e004233. https://doi.org/10.1161/
CIRCOUTCOMES.117.004233.
Morabito, M., Cecchi, L., Crisci, A., Modesti,
P.A., & Orlandini, S. (2006). Relationship
between Work-Related Accidents and
Hot Weather Conditions in Tuscany
(Central Italy). Industrial Health, 44(3),
458–464. https://doi.org/10.2486/
indhealth.44.458.
Morabito, M., Messeri, A., Crisci, A., Bao, J.,
Ma, R., Orlandini, S., Huang, C., &
Kjellstrom, T. (2020). Heat-related
productivity loss: Benefits derived by
working in the shade or work-time
shifting. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance
Management, 70(3), 507–525. https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2019-0500.
Morris, C.E., Gonzales, R.G., Hodgson, M.J.,
& Tustin, A.W. (2019). Actual and
simulated weather data to evaluate wet
bulb globe temperature and heat index as
alerts for occupational heat-related
illness. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 16(1), 54–65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2018.
1532574.
Morris, N.B., Chaseling, G.K., English, T.,
Gruss, F., Maideen, M.F.B., Capon, A., &
Jay, O. (2021). Electric fan use for cooling
during hot weather: A biophysical
modelling study. The Lancet Planetary
Health, 5(6), e368–e377. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00136-4.
Morris, N.B., English, T., Hospers, L., Capon,
A., & Jay, O. (2019). The Effects of
Electric Fan Use Under Differing Resting
Heat Index Conditions: A Clinical Trial.
Annals of Internal Medicine, 171(9), 675.
https://doi.org/10.7326/M19-0512.
Morris, N.B., Jay, O., Flouris, A.D.,
Casanueva, A., Gao, C., Foster, J.,
Havenith, G., & Nybo, L. (2020).
Sustainable solutions to mitigate
PO 00000
Frm 00363
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71059
occupational heat strain—an umbrella
review of physiological effects and global
health perspectives. Environmental
Health, 19(1), 95. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s12940-020-00641-7.
Morrissey, M.C., Brewer, G.J., Williams, W.J.,
Quinn, T., & Casa, D.J. (2021a). Impact of
occupational heat stress on worker
productivity and economic cost.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
64(12), 981–988. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ajim.23297.
Morrissey, M.C., Casa, D.J., Brewer, G.J.,
Adams, W.M., Hosokawa, Y., Benjamin,
C.L., Grundstein, A.J., Hostler, D.,
McDermott, B.P., McQuerry, M.L.,
Stearns, R.L., Filep, E.M., DeGroot, D.W.,
Fulcher, J., Flouris, A.D., Huggins, R.A.,
Jacklitsch, B.L., Jardine, J.F., Lopez,
R.M., Yeargin, S.W. (2021b). Heat Safety
in the Workplace: Modified Delphi
Consensus to Establish Strategies and
Resources to Protect the US Workers.
GeoHealth, 5(8), e2021GH000443.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GH000443.
Morrissey-Basler, M.C., Eason, C.M., Clines,
S.H., Kaufman, C.E., & Casa, D.J. (2024).
Perceived challenges and barriers for
females working in the heat. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 21(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2023.2268725.
Moyce, S., Mitchell, D., Armitage, T.,
Tancredi, D., Joseph, J., & Schenker, M.
(2017). Heat strain, volume depletion
and kidney function in California
agricultural workers. Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 74(6), 402–409.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016103848.
Murphy, G., & Wolf, J. (2022). Workers’
Compensation: Benefits, Costs, and
Coverage. National Academy of Social
Insurance.
Murray, K.O., Brant, J.O., Iwaniec, J.D.,
Sheikh, L.H., De Carvalho, L., Garcia,
C.K., Robinson, G.P., Alzahrani, J.M.,
Riva, A., Laitano, O., Kladde, M.P., &
Clanton, T.L. (2020). Exertional heat
stroke leads to concurrent long-term
epigenetic memory, immunosuppression
and altered heat shock response in
female mice. The Journal of Physiology,
599(1), 119–141. https://doi.org/10.1113/
JP280518.
Murray, K.O., Clanton, T.L., & Horowitz, M.
(2022). Epigenetic responses to heat:
From adaptation to maladaptation.
Experimental Physiology, 107(10), 1144–
1158. https://doi.org/10.1113/EP090143.
Musselman, M.E., & Saely, S. (2013).
Diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced
hyperthermia. American Journal of
Health-System Pharmacy, 70(1), 34–42.
https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp110543.
Mutic, A.D., Mix, J.M., Elon, L., Mutic, N.J.,
Economos, J., Flocks, J., Tovar-Aguilar,
A.J., & McCauley, L.A. (2018).
Classification of Heat-Related Illness
Symptoms Among Florida Farmworkers.
Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50(1),
74–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jnu.12355.
NACOSH Working Group on Heat. (2023).
Report for NACOSH at May 31, 2023
Meeting.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71060
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Nath, I. (2020). The Food Problem and the
Aggregate Productivity Consequences of
Climate Change (w27297; p. w27297).
National Bureau of Economic Research.
https://doi.org/10.3386/w27297.
National Center for Farmworker Health, Inc.
(NCFH). (2022). Facts About
Farmworkers. https://www.ncfh.org/
uploads/3/8/6/8/38685499/facts_about_
farmworkers_fact_sheet_1.10.23.pdf.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (1972). Criteria for
a recommended standard: Occupational
exposure to hot environments.
Publication 72–10269. https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/72-10269/
default.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (1986). Criteria for
a recommended standard: Occupational
exposure to hot environments.
Publication 86–113. https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/86-113/
default.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (1997). Fire Fighter
Dies of Heat Stroke While Making a Fire
Line During a Wildland Fire in
California. NIOSH FACE Program.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/
stateface/ca/97ca010.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2004).
Construction Laborer Dies from Heat
Stroke at End of Workday. NIOSH FACE
Program. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/
face/stateface/ky/03ky053.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2007). Migrant
Farm Worker Dies From Heat Stroke
While Working on a Tobacco Farm—
North Carolina. NIOSH FACE Program.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/inhouse/full200604.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2015). Landscape
Mowing Assistant Dies from Heat Stroke.
NIOSH FACE Program. https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/stateface/mi/
02mi075.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2016). Criteria for
a Recommended Standard:
Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments (2016–106). National
Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/
2016-106/default.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2017a). Heat
Stress: Hydration. https://www.cdc.gov/
niosh/mining/userfiles/works/pdfs/2017126.pdf.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2017b). Heat
Stress: Work/Rest Schedules. https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/UserFiles/
works/pdfs/2017-127.pdf.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2022, May 13).
Heat Stress—Heat Related Illness.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/
heatstress/heatrelillness.html#rash.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2023a). Heat
stress: First aid for heat illness. U.S.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Department of Health and Human
Services, Public Health Service, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health. https://doi.org/
10.26616/NIOSHPUB2024100.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2023b, March 2).
Work and fatigue. https://www.cdc.gov/
niosh/topics/fatigue/default.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH). (2024, February
14). About Heat Exposure and
Reproductive Health. https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/reproductive-health/
prevention/heat.html.
National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH) DSR. (1998).
Surveillance for Nonfatal Occupational
Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency
Departments—United States, 1996.
MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 47(15), 302–306.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2016).
Chronic Kidney Disease Tests &
Diagnosis. https://www.niddk.nih.gov/
health-information/kidney-disease/
chronic-kidney-disease-ckd/testsdiagnosis.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2017a).
Definition & Facts for Kidney Stones.
https://www.niddk.nih.go/healthinformation/urolgc-diseases/kidneystones/definition-facts.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2017b).
Symptoms & Causes of Kidney Stones.
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/healthinformtion/urologic-diseases/kidneystones/symptoms-causes.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2017c).
Treatment for Kidney Stones. https://
www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/
urologic-diseases/kidney-stones/
treatment.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2017d).
What is Chronic Kidney Disease? https://
www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/
kidney-disease/chronic-kidney-diseaseckd/what-is-chronic-kidney-disease.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). (2018).
Your Kidneys & How They Work. https://
www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/
kidney-disease/kidneys-how-theywork#:∼:text=Your kidneys remove
wastes and potassium in your blood.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). (2023a).
Aquaculture | NOAA Fisheries. https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/
aquaculture.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). (2023b). Local
Climatological Data (LCD). https://
www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/landbased-station/local-climatological-data.
National Research Council. (2009).
Strengthening Forensic Science in the
United States: A Path Forward.
CrimRxiv. https://doi.org/10.21428/
cb6ab371.b2d683d2.
PO 00000
Frm 00364
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
National Safety Council (NSC). (n.d.). NSC
Injury Facts: Work Overview. Retrieved
May 19, 2024, from https://
injuryfacts.nsc.org/work/work-overview/
work-safety-introduction/.
National Weather Service (NWS). (2022).
Weather Related Fatality and Injury
Statistics. https://www.weather.gov/
hazstat/.
National Weather Service (NWS). (2023,
August 25). Heat Index Calculator.
https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/html/
heatindex.shtml.
National Weather Service (NWS). (2024a).
National Weather Service Instruction 10–
515 WFO Non-Precipitation Weather
Products Specification. https://
www.weather.gov/media/directives/010_
pdfs/pd01005015curr.pdf.
National Weather Service (NWS). (2024b).
Regional Headquarters. https://
www.weather.gov/organization/regional.
National Weather Service (NWS). (2024c,
April 29). Heat Forecast Tools NWS
[National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration]. Heat Forecast Tools.
https://www.weather.gov/safety/heatindex.
Ndugga, N., & Artiga, S. (2023. Continued
Rises in Extreme Heat and Implications
for Health Disparities. KFF. https://
www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-healthpolicy/issue-brief/continued-rises-inextreme-heat-and-implications-forhealth-disparities/.
Ndugga, N., Pillai, D., & Artiga, S. (2023).
Climate-Related Health Risks Among
Workers: Who is at Increased Risk? KFF.
https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-andhealth-policy/issue-brief/climate-relatedhealth-risks-among-workers-who-is-atincreased-risk/.
Negrusa, S., Fomenko, O., & Thumula, V.
(2024). Impact of Excessive Heat on the
Frequency of Work-Related Injuries.
Neidell, M., Graff Zivin, J., Sheahan, M.,
Willwerth, J., Fant, C., Sarofim, M., &
Martinich, J. (2021). Temperature and
work: Time allocated to work under
varying climate and labor market
conditions. PLOS ONE, 16(8), e0254224.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0254224.
Nelson, D.A., Deuster, P.A., O’Connor, F.G.,
& Kurina, L.M. (2018a). Sickle Cell Trait
and Heat Injury Among US Army
Soldiers. American Journal of
Epidemiology, 187(3), 523–528. https://
doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx285.
Nelson, D.A., Deuster, P.A., O’Connor, F.G.,
& Kurina, L.M. (2018b). Timing and
Predictors of Mild and Severe Heat
Illness among New Military Enlistees.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise,
50(8), 1603–1612. https://doi.org/
10.1249/MSS.0000000000001623.
Nelson, G.C., Vanos, J., Havenith, G., Jay, O.,
Ebi, K.L., & Hijmans, R.J. (2024). Global
reductions in manual agricultural work
capacity due to climate change. Global
Change Biology, 30(1), e17142. https://
doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17142.
Nerbass, F.B., Moist, L., Clark, W.F., Vieira,
M.A., & Pecoits-Filho, R. (2019).
Hydration Status and Kidney Health of
Factory Workers Exposed to Heat Stress:
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
A Pilot Feasibility Study. Annals of
Nutrition and Metabolism, 74(Suppl. 3),
30–37. https://doi.org/10.1159/
000500373.
Nevada Revised Proposed Regulation, R053–
20 (2022). https://dir.nv.gov/
uploadedFiles/dirnvgov/content/OSHA/
Legislative_Matters/R05320%20%20Proposed%20Heat%20Illness%
20Regulation%20(2-28-2022).pdf.
Nichols, A., & Zeckhauser, R. (1977).
Government Comes to the Workplace:
An Assessment of OSHA. The Public
Interest, 49(39).
Nielsen, B., Kassow, K., & Aschengreen, F.E.
(1988). Heat balance during exercise in
the sun. European Journal of Applied
Physiology and Occupational
Physiology, 58(1–2), 189–196. https://
doi.org/10.1007/BF00636625.
Niemelä, R., Hannula, M., Rautio, S., Reijula,
K., & Railio, J. (2002). The effect of air
temperature on labour productivity in
call centres—A case study. Energy and
Buildings.
Noakes, T. D. (2008). A modern classification
of the exercise-related heat illnesses.
Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport, 11(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jsams.2007.02.009.
Notley, S.R., Akerman, A.P., Friesen, B.J.,
Poirier, M.P., McCourt, E., Flouris, A.D.,
& Kenny, G.P. (2022a). Heat tolerance
and the validity of occupational heat
exposure limits in women during
moderate-intensity work. Applied
Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism,
47(7), 711–724. https://doi.org/10.1139/
apnm-2022-0003.
Notley, S.R., Akerman, A.P., Friesen, B.J.,
Poirier, M.P., Sigal, R.J., Flouris, A.D.,
Boulay, P., Mccourt, E., Ruzicka, M., &
Kenny, G.P. (2021). Heat Tolerance and
Occupational Heat Exposure Limits in
Older Men with and without Type 2
Diabetes or Hypertension. Medicine &
Science in Sports & Exercise, 53(10),
2196–2206. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0000000000002698.
Notley, S. R., Akerman, A.P., & Kenny, G.P.
(2022b). Initial stay times for
uncompensable occupational heat stress
in young and older men: A preliminary
assessment. Applied Physiology,
Nutrition, and Metabolism, 47(1), 110–
113. https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-20210550.
Notley, S.R., Meade, R.D., Akerman, A.P.,
Poirier, M.P., Boulay, P., Sigal, R.J.,
Flouris, A.D., & Kenny, G.P. (2020).
Evidence for age-related differences in
heat acclimatisation responsiveness.
Experimental Physiology, 105(9), 1491–
1499. https://doi.org/10.1113/EP088728.
Notley, S.R., Park, J., Tagami, K., Ohnishi, N.,
& Taylor, N.A S. (2017). Variations in
body morphology explain sex differences
in thermoeffector function during
compensable heat stress. Experimental
Physiology, 102(5), 545–562. https://
doi.org/10.1113/EP086112.
Numé, A.-K., Kragholm, K., Carlson, N.,
Kristensen, S.L., B2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Employment: A Danish Nationwide
Retrospective Cohort Study. Circulation:
Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes,
10(4), e003202. https://doi.org/10.1161/
CIRCOUTCOMES.116.003202.
Nybo, L. (2007). Exercise and heat stress:
Cerebral challenges and consequences.
In Progress in Brain Research (Vol. 162,
pp. 29–43). Elsevier. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0079-6123(06)62003-7.
Nybo, L., Rasmussen, P., & Sawka, M.N.
(2014). Performance in the Heat—
Physiological Factors of Importance for
Hyperthermia-Induced Fatigue.
Comprehensive Physiology, 4(2). https://
doi.org/10.1002%2Fcphy.c130012.
O’Brien, K.K., Leon, L.R., & Kenefick, R.W.
(2012). Chapter 11: Clinical Management
of Heat-Related Illnesses. In Wilderness
Medicine Textbook (pp. 232–238).
Thermal and Mountain Medicine
Division.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2011). HeatRelated Illness Inspections.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2019). Regional
Emphasis Program for Heat Illnesses.
Region VI: Regional Instruction CPL 2
02–00–027A. https://www.osha.gov/
sites/default/files/enforcement/
directives/CPL_2_02-00-027A.pdf
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2021).
Inspection Guidance for Heat-Related
Hazards. Directorate of Enforcement
Programs. https://www.osha.gov/lawsregs/standardinterpretations/2021-09-01
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2022). Regional
Policy for Heat Illnesses. Region IX: San
Francisco Regional Instruction CPL 04–
00–16. https://www.osha.gov/sites/
default/files/enforcement/directives/
CPL_04-00-16.pdf
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2023a). Small
Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel
for a Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings:
Small Entity Representative (SER) Poll
Results.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) (2023b).
Employer Heat Program Question
Results.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2024a). Heat
Stress Guide. https://www.osha.gov/
emergency-preparedness/guides/heatstress
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). (2024b). Heatrelated 5(a)(1) Inspections Data.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) (2024c).
Analytical Support for Supporting
OSHA’s Preliminary Economic Analysis
for the Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
NPRM.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) (2024d).
Exposure Estimates for OSHA’s
Preliminary Economic Analysis for the
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention
NPRM.
PO 00000
Frm 00365
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71061
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) (2024e).
Noncompliance Rates for Rest Breaks.
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), & National
Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH). (2011). Protecting
workers from heat illness. https://
www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/osha-niosh-heat-illnessinfosheet.pdf.
O’Connor, F.G., Brennan, F.H., Campbell, W.,
Heled, Y., & Deuster, P. (2008). Return to
Physical Activity After Exertional
Rhabdomyolysis. Current Sports
Medicine Reports, 7(6), 328–331. https://
doi.org/10.1249/JSR.0b013e31818f0317.
O’Connor, F.G., Deuster, P., Leggit, J.,
Williams, M.E., Madsen, C.M., Beutler,
A., Nye, N.S., Kane, S.F., Oh, R., Marks,
E., Baron, J., & Cook, G.A. (2020).
Clinical Practice Guideline for the
Management of Exertional
Rhabdomyolysis in Warfighters 2020.
Warrior Heat- and Exertion-Related
Events Collaborative.
O’Connor, F.G., Williams, A.D., Blivin, S.,
Heled, Y., Deuster, P., & Flinn, S.D.
(2007). Guidelines for Return to Duty
(Play) after Heat Illness: A Military
Perspective. Journal of Sport
Rehabilitation, 16(3), 227–237. https://
doi.org/10.1123/jsr.16.3.227.
O’Donnell, T.F., & Clowes, G.H.A. (1972).
The circulatory abnormalities of heat
stroke. The New England Journal of
Medicine, 287(15), 734–737.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
(2023). Circular No. A–4. Executive
Office of the President. https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2023/11/CircularA-4.pdf.
Oh, R.C., Bury, D.C., & McClure, C.J. (2022).
Exertional rhabdomyolysis: An analysis
of 321 hospitalised US military service
members and its relationship with heat
illness. BMJ Military Health, e002028.
https://doi.org/10.1136/military-2021002028.
O*NET. (2023). Work Context.https://
www.onetcenter.org/dictionary/28.1/
excel/work_context.html.
Orlov, A., Sillmann, J., Aaheim, A., Aunan,
K., & de Bruin, K. (2019). Economic
Losses of Heat-Induced Reductions in
Outdoor Worker Productivity: A Case
Study of Europe. Economics of Disasters
and Climate Change, 3(3), 191–211.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-01900044-0.
Ortiz, X.A., Smith, J.F., Bradford, B.J.,
Harner, J.P., & Oddy, A. (2010). A
comparison of the effects of 2 cattlecooling systems on dairy cows in a
desert environment. Journal of Dairy
Science, 93(10), Article 10. https://
doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3127.
Osborne, T.F., Veigulis, Z.P., Vaidyanathan,
A., Arreola, D.M., & Schramm, P.J.
(2023). Trends in heat related illness:
Nationwide observational cohort at the
US department of veteran affairs. The
Journal of Climate Change and Health,
12, 100256. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.joclim.2023.100256.
Otani, H., Kaya, M., Tamaki, A., Goto, H., &
Maughan, R.J. (2019). Exposure to high
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71062
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
solar radiation reduces self-regulated
exercise intensity in the heat outdoors.
Physiology & Behavior, 199, 191–199.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.
2018.11.029.
Otani, H., Kaya, M., Tamaki, A., Goto, H.,
Tokizawa, K., & Maughan, R.J. (2021).
Combined effects of solar radiation and
airflow on endurance exercise capacity
in the heat. Physiology & Behavior, 229,
113264. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.physbeh.2020.113264.
Otani, H., Kaya, M., Tamaki, A., Watson, P.,
& Maughan, R.J. (2016). Effects of solar
radiation on endurance exercise capacity
in a hot environment. European Journal
of Applied Physiology, 116(4), 769–779.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-0163335-9.
Otani, H., Kaya, M., Tamaki, A., Watson, P.,
& Maughan, R.J. (2018). Air velocity
influences thermoregulation and
endurance exercise capacity in the heat.
Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and
Metabolism, 43(2), 131–138. https://
doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2017-0448.
Pan, Q., Sumner, D. A., Mitchell, D.C., &
Schenker, M. (2021). Compensation
incentives and heat exposure affect farm
worker effort. PLOS ONE, 16(11),
e0259459. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0259459.
Pandolf, K.B. (1997). Aging and human heat
tolerance. Experimental Aging Research,
23(1), 69–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/
03610739708254027.
Pandolf, K.B., Griffin, T.B., Munro, E.H., &
Goldman, R.F. (1980). Heat intolerance
as a function of percent of body surface
involved with miliaria rubra. American
Journal of Physiology-Regulatory,
Integrative and Comparative Physiology,
239(3), R233–R240. https://doi.org/
10.1152/ajpregu.1980.239.3.R233.
Park, J., Pankratz, N.M.C., & Behrer, A.
(2021). Temperature, Workplace Safety,
and Labor Market Inequality. IZA
Institute of Labor Economics. https://
doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3892588.
Park, R.J. (2022). Hot Temperature and HighStakes Performance. Journal of Human
Resources, 57(2), 400–434. https://
doi.org/10.3368/jhr.57.2.0618-9535R3.
Park, R.J., Goodman, J., Hurwitz, M., & Smith,
J. (2020). Heat and Learning. American
Economic Journal: Economic Policy,
12(2), 306–339. https://doi.org/10.1257/
pol.20180612.
Parsons, I., Snape, D., Stacey, M. J., Barlow,
M., O’Hara, J., Gall, N., Chowienczyk, P.,
Wainwright, B., & Woods, D.R. (2023).
Improvements in orthostatic tolerance
with physical training are augmented
with heat acclimation; a randomised
controlled trial. https://doi.org/10.21203/
rs.3.rs-3059681/v1.
Parsons, I. T., Cox, A. T., Mollan, I. A., &
Boos, C. J. (2015). Managing the military
patient with syncope. Journal of the
Royal Army Medical Corps, 161(3), 180–
186. https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2015000493.
Patel, D. R., Gyamfi, R., & Torres, A. (2009).
Exertional Rhabdomyolysis and Acute
Kidney Injury. The Physician and
Sportsmedicine, 37(1), 71–79. https://
doi.org/10.3810/PSM.2009.04.1685.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Patel, H. C., Rao, N., & Saha, A. (2006). Heat
exposure effects among firefighters.
Indian Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 10(3), 121.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5278.
29572.
Paull, J. M., & Rosenthal, F. S. (1987). Heat
Strain and Heat Stress for Workers
Wearing Protective Suits at a Hazardous
Waste Site. American Industrial Hygiene
Association Journal, 48(5), 458–463.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668
791385048.
Pearson, J., Lucas, R. A. I., Schlader, Z. J.,
Zhao, J., Gagnon, D., & Crandall, C. G.
(2014). Active and passive heat stress
similarly compromise tolerance to a
simulated hemorrhagic challenge.
American Journal of PhysiologyRegulatory, Integrative and Comparative
Physiology, 307(7), R822–R827. https://
doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00199.2014.
Périard, J. D., DeGroot, D., & Jay, O. (2022).
Exertional heat stroke in sport and the
military: Epidemiology and mitigation.
Experimental Physiology, 107(10), 1111–
1121. https://doi.org/10.1113/EP090686.
Perkison, W. B., Schaefer, C. M., GreenMcKenzie, J., Roy, R. W., Shofer, F. S.,
& McCarthy, R. B. (2024). Outcomes for
a Heat Illness Prevention Program in
Outdoor Workers: A 9-Year Overview.
Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 66(4), 293–297.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000
000003051.
Peterkin, N. D., Atkin, J. S., & Coris, E. E.
(2016). What Is the Best Practice for the
Treatment of Exertional Heat Illnesses
(Heat Cramps, Heat Syncope, Heat
Exhaustion, and Exertional Heat Stroke)?
Athletic Training & Sports Health Care,
8(3), 97–99. https://doi.org/10.3928/
19425864-20160303-01.
Petitti, D. B., Harlan, S. L., Chowell-Puente,
G., & Ruddell, D. (2013). Occupation and
Environmental Heat-Associated Deaths
in Maricopa County, Arizona: A CaseControl Study. PLoS ONE, 8(5), e62596.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0062596.
Petropoulos, Z. E., Keogh, S. A., Jarquı́n, E.,
López-Pilarte, D., Amador Velázquez, J.
J., Garcı́a-Trabanino, R., Amador
Sánchez, M. R., Guevara, R., Gruener, A.,
Allen, D. R., Leibler, J. H., Delgado, I. S.,
McClean, M. D., Friedman, D. J., Brooks,
D. R., & Scammell, M. K. (2023). Heat
stress and heat strain among outdoor
workers in El Salvador and Nicaragua.
Journal of Exposure Science &
Environmental Epidemiology, 33(4),
622–630. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370023-00537-x.
Phan, V., & Beck, J. W. (2023). Why Do
People (Not) Take Breaks? An
Investigation of Individuals’ Reasons for
Taking and for Not Taking Breaks at
Work. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 38(2), 259–282. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09866-4.
Phinney, L. T., Gardner, J. W., Kark, J. A., &
Bruce Wenger, C. (2001). Long-term
follow-up after exertional heat illness
during recruit training. Medicine &
Science in Sports & Exercise, 33(9),
PO 00000
Frm 00366
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1443–1448. https://doi.org/10.1097/
00005768-200109000-00004.
Piil, J. F., Lundbye-Jensen, J., Trangmar, S. J.,
& Nybo, L. (2017). Performance in
complex motor tasks deteriorates in
hyperthermic humans. Temperature,
4(4), 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/
23328940.2017.1368877.
Pilcher, J. J., Nadler, E., & Busch, C. (2002).
Effects of hot and cold temperature
exposure on performance: A metaanalytic review. Ergonomics, 45(10),
682–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00140130210158419.
Pin, N. T., Ling, N. Y., & Siang, L. H. (1992).
Dehydration from outdoor work and
urinary stones in a tropical environment.
Occupational Medicine, 42(1), 30–32.
https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/42.1.30.
Pinkerton, L. E., Bertke, S., Dahm, M. M.,
Kubale, T. L., Siegel, M. R., Hales, T. R.,
Yiin, J. H., Purdue, M. P., Beaumont, J.
J., & Daniels, R. D. (2022). End-stage
renal disease incidence in a cohort of US
firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago,
and Philadelphia. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 65(12), 975–984.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23435.
Pogačar, T., Žnidaršič, Z., Kajfež Bogataj, L.,
Flouris, A., Poulianiti, K., & Črepinšek,
Z. (2019). Heat Waves Occurrence and
Outdoor Workers’ Self-assessment of
Heat Stress in Slovenia and Greece.
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 16(4), 597.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16040597.
Pradhan, B., Kjellstrom, T., Atar, D., Sharma,
P., Kayastha, B., Bhandari, G., &
Pradhan, P. K. (2019). Heat Stress
Impacts on Cardiac Mortality in Nepali
Migrant Workers in Qatar. Cardiology,
143(1–2), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1159/
000500853.
Prudhomme, J., & Neidhardt, A. (2006). Cal/
OSHA Investigations of Heat Related
Illnesses [Personal communication].
Prudhomme, J., & Neidhardt, A. (2007). Cal/
OHSA investigations of Heat-Related
Illness 2006 [Personal communication].
Pryor, R. R., Larson, J. R., Vandermark, L. W.,
Johnson, B. D., & Schlader, Z. J. (2023).
Water consumption patterns impact
hydration markers in males working in
accordance with the National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health
recommendations. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene, 20(9), 414–425. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15459624.2023.2221713.
Public Citizen, Farmworker Justice, United
Farm Workers Foundation, 350 Spokane,
350.org, Academic Health Resources,
Alliance of Nurses for Healthy
Environments, American Federation of
State, County and Municipal
Employees—AFL–CIO, American
Federation of Teachers, Association of
Farmworker Opportunity Programs,
Association of Western Pulp and Paper
Workers, Boston University School of
Public Health, California Rural Legal
Assistance Foundation, California State
University East Bay, CATA—The
Farmworkers Support Committee,
Catskill Mountainkeeper, Center for
Biological Diversity, Center for
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Progressive Reform, . . . Whyte, Y.
(2018). Petition to OSHA for a Heat
Standard. https://www.citizen.org/
article/petition-to-osha-for-a-heatstandard/.
Qiu, Y., & Zhao, J. (2022). Adaptation and the
distributional effects of heat: Evidence
from professional archery competitions.
Southern Economic Journal, 88(3), 1149–
1177. https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12553.
Quiller, G., Krenz, J., Ebi, K., Hess, J. J.,
Fenske, R. A., Sampson, P. D., Pan, M.,
& Spector, J. T. (2017). Heat exposure
and productivity in orchards:
Implications for climate change research.
Archives of Environmental &
Occupational Health, 72(6), 313–316.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19338244.2017.
1288077.
Rachootin, P., & Olsen, J. (1983). The Risk of
Infertility and Delayed Conception
Associated With Exposures in the Danish
Workplace. Journal of Occupational
Medicine, 25(5), 394–402.
Racinais, S., Alonso, J. M., Coutts, A. J.,
Flouris, A. D., Girard, O.,
González-Alonso, J., Hausswirth, C., Jay,
O., Lee, J. K. W., Mitchell, N., Nassis, G.
P., Nybo, L., Pluim, B. M., Roelands, B.,
Sawka, M. N., Wingo, J. E., & Périard, J.
D. (2015). Consensus recommendations
on training and competing in the heat.
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine &
Science in Sports, 25(S1), 6–19. https://
doi.org/10.1111/sms.12467.
Racinais, S., Buchheit, M., Bilsborough, J.,
Bourdon, P. C., Cordy, J., & Coutts, A. J.
(2014). Physiological and Performance
Responses to a Training Camp in the
Heat in Professional Australian Football
Players. International Journal of Sports
Physiology and Performance, 9(4), 598–
603. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.20130284.
Racinais, S., Mohr, M., Buchheit, M., Voss, S.
C., Gaoua, N., Grantham, J., & Nybo, L.
(2012). Individual responses to shortterm heat acclimatisation as predictors of
football performance in a hot, dry
environment. British Journal of Sports
Medicine, 46(11), 810–815. https://
doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2012-091227
Ramsey, J. D. (1975). Heat Stress Standard:
OSHA’s Advisory Committee
Recommendations. National Safety
News, 111(6), 89–95.
Ramsey, J. D. (1995). Task performance in
heat: A review. Ergonomics, 38(1), 154–
165.
Ramsey, J. D., Burford, C. L., Beshir, M. Y.,
& Jensen, R. C. (1983). Effects of
workplace thermal conditions on safe
work behavior. Journal of Safety
Research, 14(3), 105–114. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0022-4375(83)90021-X.
Ramsey, J. D., & Kwon, Y. G. (1992).
Recommended alert limits for perceptual
motor loss in hot environments.
International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 9(3), 245–257. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(92)90018-U.
Rao, P. (2007). Heat Related Illnesses: An
Occupational Health Concern for
Farmworkers. Farmworker Justice and
Migrant Clinicians Network.
Ratkalkar, V.N., & Kleinman, J. G. (2011).
Mechanisms of Stone Formation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Clinical Reviews in Bone and Mineral
Metabolism, 9(3), 187–197. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12018-011-9104-8.
Ravanelli, N.M., Gagnon, D., Hodder, S.G.,
Havenith, G., & Jay, O. (2017). The
biophysical and physiological basis for
mitigated elevations in heart rate with
electric fan use in extreme heat and
humidity. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 61(2), 313–323. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00484-016-1213-0.
Ravanelli, N.M., Hodder, S.G., Havenith, G.,
& Jay, O. (2015). Heart Rate and Body
Temperature Responses to Extreme Heat
and Humidity With and Without Electric
Fans. JAMA, 313(7), 724. https://doi.org/
10.1001/jama.2015.153.
Rekha, S., Nalini, S.J., Bhuvana, S., Kanmani,
S., Hirst, J.E., & Venugopal, V. (2023).
Heat stress and adverse pregnancy
outcome: Prospective cohort study.
BJOG: An International Journal of
Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 131(5), 612–
622. https://doi.org/10.1111/14710528.17680.
Renbourn, E.T. (1958). The History of Sweat
and Prickly Heat, 19th–20th Century.
Journal of Investigative Dermatology,
30(5), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1038/
jid.1958.50.
Riccò, M., Vezzosi, L., Bragazzi, N.L., &
Balzarini, F. (2020). Heat-Related
Illnesses among Pesticide Applicators in
North-Eastern Italy (2017). Journal of
Agromedicine, 25(1), 52–64. https://
doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2019.
1606745.
Rice, C. (2002). Wage Rates for Economic
Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory
Program. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
Rivero, N., & Uzcategui, E.M. (2024, February
17). These farmworkers created
America’s strongest workplace heat
rules. Washington Post. https://
www.washingtonpost.com/climatesolutions/interactive/2024/farmworkerheat-safety-fair-food-program/
Roback, J. (1982). Wages, Rents, and the
Quality of Life. Journal of Political
Economy, 90(6), 1257–1278. https://
doi.org/10.1086/261120
Roberts, G.T., Ghebeh, H., Chishti, M.A., AlMohanna, F., El-Sayed, R., Al-Mohanna,
F., & Bouchama, A. (2008).
Microvascular Injury, Thrombosis,
Inflammation, and Apoptosis in the
Pathogenesis of Heatstroke: A Study in
Baboon Model. Arteriosclerosis,
Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, 28(6),
1130–1136. https://doi.org/10.1161/
ATVBAHA.107.158709
Roberts, W.O., Armstrong, L.E., Sawka, M.N.,
Yeargin, S.W., Heled, Y., Yeargin, S., &
O’Connor, F. G. (2023). ACSM Expert
Consensus Statement on Exertional Heat
Illness: Recognition, Management, and
Return to Activity. Current Sports
Medicine Reports, 22(4), 134–149.
Rocha, L.A., Fromknecht, C.Q., Redman,
S.D., Brady, J.E., Hodge, S.E., & Noe, R.S.
(2017). Medicolegal Death Scene
Investigations after Natural Disaster- and
Weather-Related Events: A Review of the
Literature. Academic Forensic Pathology,
7(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.23907/
2017.023
PO 00000
Frm 00367
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71063
Roddie, I.C., Shepherd, J.T., & Whelan, R.F.
(1957). The contribution of constrictor
and dilator nerves to the skin
vasodilatation during body heating. The
Journal of Physiology, 136(3), 489–497.
https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.
1957.sp005775
Rode, A., Baker, R.E., Carleton, T.,
D’Agostino, A., Delgado, M., Foreman,
T., Gergel, D.R., Greenstone, M., Houser,
T., Hsiang, S., Hultgren, A., Jina, A.,
Kopp, R.E., Malevich, S.B., McCusker,
K., Nath, I., Pecenco, M., Rising, J., &
Yuan, J. (2022). Labor Disutility in a
Warmer World: The Impact of Climate
Change on the Global Workforce. SSRN
Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/
10.2139/ssrn.4221478.
Rogers, J.D. (2012). Hoover Dam:
Construction Milestones in Concrete
Delivery and Placement, Steel
Fabrication, and Job Site Safety. 163–
188.
Romanello, M., Napoli, C. di, Green, C.,
Kennard, H., Lampard, P., Scamman, D.,
Walawender, M., Ali, Z., Ameli, N.,
Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Beggs, P.J., Belesova,
K., Berrang Ford, L., Bowen, K., Cai, W.,
Callaghan, M., Campbell-Lendrum, D.,
Chambers, J., Cross, T.J., . . . Costello, A.
(2023). The 2023 report of the Lancet
Countdown on health and climate
change: The imperative for a healthcentred response in a world facing
irreversible harms. The Lancet,
402(10419), 2346–2394. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01859-7
Roman-Ponce, H., Thatcher, W.W.,
Buffington, D.E., Wilcox, C.J., & Van
Horn, H. H. (1977). Physiological and
Production Responses of Dairy Cattle to
a Shade Structure in a Subtropical
Environment. Journal of Dairy Science,
60(3), 424–430. https://doi.org/10.3168/
jds.S0022-0302(77)83882-4.
Roncal Jimenez, C.A., Ishimoto, T., Lanaspa,
M. A., Rivard, C.J., Nakagawa, T., Ejaz,
A.A., Cicerchi, C., Inaba, S., Le, M.,
Miyazaki, M., Glaser, J., Correa-Rotter,
R., González, M.A., Aragón, A.,
Wesseling, C., Sánchez-Lozada, L. G., &
Johnson, R.J. (2014). Fructokinase
activity mediates dehydration-induced
renal injury. Kidney International, 86(2),
294–302. https://doi.org/10.1038/
ki.2013.492.
Roncal-Jimenez, C., Lanaspa, M.A., Jensen,
T., Sanchez-Lozada, L.G., & Johnson, R.J.
(2015). Mechanisms by Which
Dehydration May Lead to Chronic
Kidney Disease. Annals of Nutrition and
Metabolism, 66(Suppl. 3), 10–13. https://
doi.org/10.1159/000381239.
Rosenman, K.D., Kalush, A., Reilly, M.J.,
Gardiner, J.C., Reeves, M., & Luo, Z.
(2006). How Much Work-Related Injury
and Illness is Missed By the Current
National Surveillance System? Journal of
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 48(4), 357–365. https://
doi.org/10.1097/01.jom.0000205864.
81970.63.
Rosner, M.H., & Kirven, J. (2007). ExerciseAssociated Hyponatremia. Clinical
Journal of the American Society of
Nephrology, 2(1), 151–161. https://
doi.org/10.2215/CJN.02730806.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71064
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Ross, J.A., Shipp, E.M., Trueblood, A.B., &
Bhattacharya, A. (2016). Ergonomics and
Beyond: Understanding How Chemical
and Heat Exposures and Physical
Exertions at Work Affect Functional
Ability, Injury, and Long-Term Health.
Human Factors: The Journal of the
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,
58(5), 777–795. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0018720816645457.
Roti Roti, J.L. (2008). Cellular responses to
hyperthermia (40–46°C): Cell killing and
molecular events. International Journal
of Hyperthermia, 24(1), 3–15. https://
doi.org/10.1080/02656730701769841
Rowlinson, S., YunyanJia, A., Li, B., &
ChuanjingJu, C. (2014). Management of
climatic heat stress risk in construction:
A review of practices, methodologies,
and future research. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 66, 187–198. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.aap.2013.08.011.
Ruggles, S., Flood, S., Sobek, M., Backman,
D., Chen, A., Cooper, G., Richards, S.,
Rodgers, R., & Schouweiler, M. (2024).
IPUMS USA: Version 15.0 American
Community Survey 2018–2022 (15.0)
[dataset]. Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS.
https://doi.org/10.18128/D010.V15.0.
Ruser, J. W. (2008, August). Examining
evidence on whether BLS undercounts
workplace injuries and illnesses.
Monthly Labor Review. https://
www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/08/
art2full.pdf.
Russell, J., & Conroy, C. (1991).
Representativeness of deaths identified
through the injury-at-work item on the
death certificate: Implications for
surveillance. American Journal of Public
Health, 81(12), 1613–1618. https://
doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.81.12.1613.
Sadiq, L. S., Hashim, Z., & Osman, M. (2019).
The Impact of Heat on Health and
Productivity among Maize Farmers in a
Tropical Climate Area. Journal of
Environmental and Public Health, 2019,
1–7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/
9896410.
SafetySign.com. (2024). Caution Hot Work
Area Sign. Safetysign.com
Sahu, S., Sett, M., & Kjellstrom, T. (2013).
Heat Exposure, Cardiovascular Stress
and Work Productivity in Rice
Harvesters in India: Implications for a
Climate Change Future. Industrial
Health, 51(4), 424–431. https://doi.org/
10.2486/indhealth.2013-0006.
Saigal, C.S., Joyce, G., Timilsina, A.R., & The
Urologic Diseases In America Project.
(2005). Direct and indirect costs of
nephrolithiasis in an employed
population: Opportunity for disease
management? Kidney International,
68(4), 1808–1814. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00599.x.
Sanchez, C.A., Thomas, K.E., Malilay, J., &
Annest, J.L. (2010). Nonfatal Natural and
Environmental Injuries Treated in
Emergency Departments, United States,
2001–2004. Family & Community
Health, 33(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/
10.1097/FCH.0b013e3181c4e2fa.
Sandor, R. P. (1997). Heat Illness: On-Site
Diagnosis and Cooling. The Physician
and Sportsmedicine, 25(6), 35–40.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.1997.
11440257
Santelli, J., Sullivan, J.M., Czarnik, A., &
Bedolla, J. (2014). Heat Illness In The
Emergency Department: Keeping Your
Cool. Emergency Medicine Practice,
16(8).
Sanusi, R., Johnstone, D., May, P., & Livesley,
S.J. (2016). Street Orientation and Side of
the Street Greatly Influence the
Microclimatic Benefits Street Trees Can
Provide in Summer. Journal of
Environmental Quality, 45(1), 167–174.
https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2015.01.0039.
Sato, Y., Roncal-Jimenez, C.A., AndresHernando, A., Jensen, T., Tolan, D.R.,
Sanchez-Lozada, L.G., Newman, L.S.,
Butler-Dawson, J., Sorensen, C., Glaser,
J., Miyazaki, M., Diaz, H.F., Ishimoto, T.,
Kosugi, T., Maruyama, S., Garcia, G.E.,
Lanaspa, M.A., & Johnson, R.J. (2019).
Increase of core temperature affected the
progression of kidney injury by repeated
heat stress exposure. American Journal
of Physiology-Renal Physiology, 317(5),
F1111-F1121. https://doi.org/10.1152/
ajprenal.00259.2019.
Saunders, A.G., Dugas, J.P., Tucker, R.,
Lambert, M. I., & Noakes, T. D. (2005).
The effects of different air velocities on
heat storage and body temperature in
humans cycling in a hot, humid
environment. Acta Physiologica
Scandinavica, 183(3), 241–255. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-201X.2004.
01400.x
Sauret, J.M., Marinides, G., & Wang, G.K.
(2002). Rhabdomyolysis. American
Family Physician, 65(5), 907–912.
Savioli, G., Zanza, C., Longhitano, Y.,
Nardone, A., Varesi, A., Ceresa, I. F.,
Manetti, A.C., Volonnino, G., Maiese, A.,
& La Russa, R. (2022). Heat-Related
Illness in Emergency and Critical Care:
Recommendations for Recognition and
Management with Medico-Legal
Considerations. Biomedicines, 10(10),
2542. https://doi.org/10.3390/
biomedicines10102542.
Sawka, M.N., Leon, L.R., Montain, S.J., &
Sonna, L.A. (2011). Integrated
Physiological Mechanisms of Exercise
Performance, Adaptation, and
Maladaptation to Heat Stress. In
Comprehensive Physiology (1st ed., pp.
1883–1928). Wiley. https://doi.org/
10.1002/cphy.c100082.
Sawka, M.N., Wenger, C.B., Young, A.J., &
Pandolf, K.B. (1993). Physiological
Responses to Exercise in the Heat.
Nutritional Needs in Hot Environments:
Applications for Military Personnel in
Field Operations, 55–74.
Schallig, W., Levels, K., & Daanen, H.A.
(2017). The influence of heat on the
occurrence of exercise associated muscle
cramps: A review. Sport En
Geneeskunde, 1, 30–39.
Scherzer, T., Rugulies, R., & Krause, N.
(2005). Work-Related Pain and Injury
and Barriers to Workers’ Compensation
Among Las Vegas Hotel Room Cleaners.
American Journal of Public Health,
95(3), 483–488. https://doi.org/10.2105/
AJPH.2003.033266
Schickele, E. (1947). Environment and fatal
heat stroke: An analysis of 157 cases
PO 00000
Frm 00368
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
occurring in the Army in the U.S. during
World War II. The Military Surgeon,
100(3), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/
milmed/100.3.235
Schlader, Z.J., Chapman, C.L., Sarker, S.,
Russo, L., Rideout, T.C., Parker, M.D.,
Johnson, B.D., & Hostler, D. (2017).
Firefighter Work Duration Influences the
Extent of Acute Kidney Injury. Medicine
& Science in Sports & Exercise, 49(8),
1745–1753. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.
0000000000001254.
Schlader, Z.J., Davis, M.S., & Bouchama, A.
(2022). Biomarkers of heatstroke-induced
organ injury and repair. Experimental
Physiology, 107(10), 1159–1171. https://
doi.org/10.1113/EP090142.
Schlader, Z.J., Hostler, D., Parker, M.D.,
Pryor, R.R., Lohr, J.W., Johnson, B.D., &
Chapman, C.L. (2019). The Potential for
Renal Injury Elicited by Physical Work
in the Heat. Nutrients, 11(9), 2087.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11092087
Schlader, Z.J., Wilson, T. E., & Crandall, C.
G. (2016). Mechanisms of orthostatic
intolerance during heat stress.
Autonomic Neuroscience, 196, 37–46.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autneu.2015.
12.005
Schrier, R.W., Hano, J., Keller, H.I., Finkel,
R.M., Gilliland, P.F., Cirksena, W.J., &
Teschan, P.E. (1970). Renal Metabolic
and Circulatory Responses to Heat and
Exercise. Annals of Internal Medicine,
73(2), 213–223.
Schrier, R.W., Henderson, H. S., Tisher, C.C.,
& Tannen, R.L. (1967). Nephropathy
Associated with Heat Stress and
Exercise. Annals of Internal Medicine,
67(2), 356–376.
Schroeder, C., Bush, V.E., Norcliffe, L.J., Luft,
F.C., Tank, J., Jordan, J., & Hainsworth,
R. (2002). Water Drinking Acutely
Improves Orthostatic Tolerance in
Healthy Subjects. Circulation, 106(22),
2806–2811. https://doi.org/10.1161/
01.CIR.0000038921.64575.D0.
Sefton, J.M., McAdam, J.S., Pascoe, D.D.,
Lohse, K.R., Banda, R.L., Henault, C.B.,
Cherrington, A.R., & Adams, N.E. (2016).
Evaluation of 2 Heat-Mitigation Methods
in Army Trainees. Journal of Athletic
Training, 51(11), 936–945. https://
doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-51.10.13.
Selkirk, G.A., McLellan, T.M., & Wong, J.
(2004). Active Versus Passive Cooling
During Work in Warm Environments
While Wearing Firefighting Protective
Clothing. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 1(8), 521–531.
https://doi.org/10.1080/154596204904
75216.
Semenza, J.C., McCullough, J.E., Flanders, D.,
McGeehin, M.A., & Lumpkin, J.R. (1999).
Excess hospital admissions during the
July 1995 heat wave in Chicago.
American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 16(4), 269–277. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(99)00025-2.
Seo, Y., Powell, J., Strauch, A., Roberge, R.,
Kenny, G.P., & Kim, J.-H. (2019). Heat
stress assessment during intermittent
work under different environmental
conditions and clothing combinations of
effective wet bulb globe temperature
(WBGT). Journal of Occupational and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Environmental Hygiene, 16(7), 467–476.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2019.
1612523.
Seppänen, O., Fisk, W.J., & Lei, Q. (2006).
Effect of Temperature on Task
Performance in Office Environment.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Seto, C.K., Way, D., & O’Connor, N. (2005).
Environmental Illness in Athletes.
Clinics in Sports Medicine, 24(3), 695–
718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csm.
2005.03.002.
Sett, M., & Sahu, S. (2014). Effects of
occupational heat exposure on female
brick workers in West Bengal, India.
Global Health Action, 7(1), 21923.
https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v7.21923.
Sexton, S., Wang, Z., & Mullins, J.T. (2022).
Heat Adaptation and Human
Performance in a Warming Climate.
Journal of the Association of
Environmental and Resource
Economists, 9(1), 141–163. https://
doi.org/10.1086/715509.
Shaikh, Z. (2023). Autopsy reveals cause of
death for mail carrier who collapsed in
Dallas heat. Dallas News. https://
www.dallasnews.com/new/2023/09/30/
autopsy-reveals-cause-of-death-for-mailcarrier-who-collapsed-in-dallas-heat/.
Sharma, V.M., Pichan, G., & Panwar, M.R.
(1983). Differential effects of hot-humid
and hot-dry environments on mental
functions. International Archives of
Occupational and Environmental
Health, 52(4), 315–327. https://doi.org/
10.1007/BF02226897.
SHARP. (2022). Heat-related Illness in New
Workers (SHARP Publication 76–31–
2022; SHARP Stats). Washington
Department of Labor and Industries.
https://lni.wa.gov/safety-health/safetyresearch/files/2022/76_31_2022_HRI_
Tenure.pdf.
Shen, T., Howe, H.L., Alo, C., & Moolenaar,
R.L. (1998). Toward A Broader Definition
of Heat-Related Death: Comparison of
Mortality Estimates From Medical
Examiners’ Classification With Those
From Total Death Differentials During
the July 1995 Heat Wave in Chicago,
Illinois: The American Journal of
Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 19(2),
113–118. https://doi.org/10.1097/
00000433-199806000-00003.
Shi, D.S., Weaver, V.M., Hodgson, M.J., &
Tustin, A.W. (2022). Hospitalised heatrelated acute kidney injury in indoor and
outdoor workers in the USA.
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 79(3), 184–191. https://
doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2021-107933
Shiao, T.F., Chen, J.C., Yang, D.W., Lee, S. N.,
Lee, C.F., & Cheng, W. T. K. (2011).
Feasibility assessment of a tunnelventilated, water-padded barn on
alleviation of heat stress for lactating
Holstein cows in a humid area. Journal
of Dairy Science, 94(11), Article 11.
https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3730.
Shire, J., Vaidyanathan, A., Lackovic, M., &
Bunn, T. (2020). Association Between
Work-Related Hyperthermia Emergency
Department Visits and Ambient Heat in
Five Southeastern States, 2010–2012—A
Case-Crossover Study. GeoHealth, 4(8),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:41 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
e2019GH000241. https://doi.org/
10.1029/2019GH000241.
Shirreffs, S.M., & Maughan, R.J. (1997).
Whole body sweat collection in humans:
An improved method with preliminary
data on electrolyte content. Journal of
Applied Physiology, 82(1), 336–341.
https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1997.82.
1.336.
Shvartz, E., Meroz, A., Magazanik, A.,
Shoenfeld, Y., & Shapiro, Y. (1977).
Exercise and heat orthostatism and the
effect of heat acclimation and physical
fitness. Aviation, Space, and
Environmental Medicine, 48(9), 836–842.
Simmons, S.E., Saxby, B.K., McGlone, F.P., &
Jones, D.A. (2008). The effect of passive
heating and head cooling on perception,
cardiovascular function and cognitive
performance in the heat. European
Journal of Applied Physiology, 104(2),
271–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421008-0677-y.
Singh, S., Hanna, E.G., & Kjellstrom, T.
(2015). Working in Australia’s heat:
Health promotion concerns for health
and productivity. Health Promotion
International, 30(2), 239–250. https://
doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dat027.
Sinha, P., Caulkins, M.L., & Cropper, M.L.
(2018). Household location decisions
and the value of climate amenities.
Journal of Environmental Economics and
Management, 92, 608–637. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2017.08.005.
Small Business Administration (SBA).
(2023). Table of Small Business Size
Standards. https://www.sba.gov/
document/support-table-size-standards.
Smallcombe, J.W., Foster, J., Hodder, S.G.,
Jay, O., Flouris, A.D., & Havenith, G.
(2022). Quantifying the impact of heat on
human physical work capacity; part IV:
Interactions between work duration and
heat stress severity. International Journal
of Biometeorology, 66(12), 2463–2476.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-02202370-7.
Smit, A.A.J., Halliwill, J.R., Low, P.A., &
Wieling, W. (1999). Pathophysiological
basis of orthostatic hypotension in
autonomic failure. The Journal of
Physiology, 519(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1469-7793.1999.0001o.x.
Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature
and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
Smith, D.J., Ferranti, E.P., Hertzberg, V.S., &
Mac, V. (2021). Knowledge of HeatRelated Illness First Aid and SelfReported Hydration and Heat-Related
Illness Symptoms in Migrant
Farmworkers. Workplace Health &
Safety, 69(1), 15–21. https://doi.org/
10.1177/2165079920934478.
Somanathan, E., Somanathan, R., Sudarshan,
A., & Tewari, M. (2021). The Impact of
Temperature on Productivity and Labor
Supply: Evidence from Indian
Manufacturing. Journal of Political
Economy, 129(6), 1797–1827. https://
doi.org/10.1086/713733.
Sonna, L.A., Wenger, C.B., Flinn, S.,
Sheldon, H.K., Sawka, M.N., & Lilly,
C.M. (2004). Exertional heat injury and
gene expression changes: A DNA
microarray analysis study. Journal of
PO 00000
Frm 00369
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71065
Applied Physiology, 96(5), 1943–1953.
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.
00886.2003.
Sorensen, C.J., Butler-Dawson, J., Dally, M.,
Krisher, L., Griffin, B.R., Johnson, R.J.,
Lemery, J., Asensio, C., Tenney, L., &
Newman, L.S. (2019). Risk Factors and
Mechanisms Underlying Cross-Shift
Decline in Kidney Function in
Guatemalan Sugarcane Workers. Journal
of Occupational & Environmental
Medicine, 61(3), 239–250. https://
doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000
001529.
Sorkin, I. (2018). Ranking Firms Using
Revealed Preference. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 133(3), 1331–
1393. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy001.
Spector, J.T., Bonauto, D.K., Sheppard, L.,
Busch-Isaksen, T., Calkins, M., Adams,
D.A., Lieblich, M., & Fenske, R.A. (2016).
A Case-Crossover Study of Heat
Exposure and Injury Risk in Outdoor
Agricultural Workers. PLOS One, 11(10),
e0164498. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0164498.
Spector, J.T., Krenz, J., & Blank, K.N. (2015).
Risk Factors for Heat-Related Illness in
Washington Crop Workers. Journal of
Agromedicine, 20(3), 349–359. https://
doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2015.
1047107.
Spector, J.T., Krenz, J., Calkins, M., Ryan, D.,
Carmona, J., Pan, M., Zemke, A., &
Sampson, P.D. (2018). Associations
between heat exposure, vigilance, and
balance performance in summer tree
fruit harvesters. Applied Ergonomics, 67,
1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.
2017.09.002.
Spector, J.T., Krenz, J., Rauser, E., & Bonauto,
D.K. (2014). Heat-related illness in
Washington State agriculture and
forestry sectors. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 57(8), 881–895.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22357.
Spector, J.T., Sampson, L., Flunker, J.C.,
Adams, D., & Bonauto, D.K. (2023).
Occupational heat-related illness in
Washington State: A descriptive study of
day of illness and prior day ambient
temperatures among cases and clusters,
2006–2021. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 66(8), 623–636.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23506.
Steadman, R.G. (1979). The Assessment of
Sultriness. Part I: A TemperatureHumidity Index Based on Human
Physiology and Clothing Science. Journal
of Applied Meteorology, 18(7), 861–873.
https://doi.org/10.1175/15200450(1979)018<0861:TAOSPI>2.0.CO;2.
Stevens, A. (2017). Temperature, Wages, and
Agricultural Labor Productivity [Working
paper].
Stoecklin-Marois, M., Hennessy-Burt, T.,
Mitchell, D., & Schenker, M. (2013).
Heat-related Illness Knowledge and
Practices among California Hired Farm
Workers in The MICASA Study.
Industrial Health, 51(1), 47–55. https://
doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2012-0128.
Stöllberger, C., Lutz, W., & Finsterer, J.
(2009). Heat-related side-effects of
neurological and non-neurological
medication may increase heatwave
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71066
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
fatalities. European Journal of
Neurology, 16(7), 879–882. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.
02581.x.
Stonehill, R.B., & Keil, P.G. (1961).
Successful Preventive Medical Measures
Against Heat Illness at Lackland Air
Force Base. American Journal of Public
Health and the Nations Health, 51(4),
586–590. https://doi.org/10.2105/
AJPH.51.4.586.
Sulzberger, M.B., & Griffin, T.B. (1969).
Induced Miliaria, Postmiliarial
Hypohidrosis, and Some Potential
Sequelae. Archives of Dermatology,
99(2), 145. https://doi.org/10.1001/
archderm.1969.01610200017003.
Sunstein, C.R. (2014). The Limits of
Quantification. SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2424878.
Taggart, S.M., Girard, O., Landers, G.J., &
Wallman, K.E. (2024). Symptoms of heat
illness and water consumption habits in
mine industry workers over the summer
months in Australia. Industrial Health,
2023–0139. https://doi.org/10.2486/
indhealth.2023-0139.
Takakura, J., Fujimori, S., Takahashi, K.,
Hijioka, Y., Hasegawa, T., Honda, Y., &
Masui, T. (2017). Cost of preventing
workplace heat-related illness through
worker breaks and the benefit of climatechange mitigation. Environmental
Research Letters, 12(6), 064010. https://
doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa72cc.
Talbott, J.H., & Michelsen, J. (1933). Heat
Cramps. A Clinical and Chemical Study.
The Journal of Clinical Investigation,
12(3), 533–549. https://doi.org/10.1172/
JCI100516.
Tawatsupa, B., Yiengprugsawan, V.,
Kjellstrom, T., Berecki-Gisolf, J.,
Seubsman, S.-A., & Sleigh, A. (2013).
Association between Heat Stress and
Occupational Injury among Thai
Workers: Findings of the Thai Cohort
Study. Industrial Health, 51(1), 34–46.
https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.20120138.
Taylor, L., Watkins, S.L., Marshall, H.,
Dascombe, B.J., & Foster, J. (2016). The
Impact of Different Environmental
Conditions on Cognitive Function: A
Focused Review. Frontiers in Physiology,
6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2015.
00372.
Tetzlaff, E.J., O’Connor, F.K., Meade, R.D., &
Kenny, G.P. (2024). An exploratory
survey of on-site heat stress management
practices in the Canadian mining
industry. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 1–14. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2024.2332722.
Thaler, R.H., & Sunstein, C.R. (2009). Nudge:
Improving decisions about health,
wealth and happiness (Revised edition,
new international edition). Penguin
Books.
Thompson, T.L., Nguyen, T.X., & Karodeh,
C.R. (2018). Twelve cases of exertional
rhabdomyolysis in college football
players from the same institution over a
23-year span: A descriptive study. The
Physician and Sportsmedicine, 46(3),
331–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00913847.2018.1481717.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:41 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Thongprayoon, C., Petnak, T., Kanduri, S.R.,
Kovvuru, K., Cheungpasitporn, W.,
Boonpheng, B., Chewcharat, A., Bathini,
T., Medaura, J., Vallabhajosyula, S., &
Kaewput, W. (2020). Impact of
rhabdomyolysis on outcomes of
hospitalizations for heat stroke in the
United States. Hospital Practice, 48(5),
276–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/
21548331.2020.1792214.
Thonneau, P., Ducot, B., Bujan, L., Mieusset,
R., & Spira, A. (1997). Effect of male
occupational heat exposure on time to
pregnancy. International Journal of
Andrology, 20(5), 274–278. https://
doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2605.1997.d01303.x.
Tokizawa, K., Sawada, S., Oka, T., Yasuda,
A., Tai, T., Ida, H., & Nakayama, K.
(2014). Fan-precooling effect on heat
strain while wearing protective clothing.
International Journal of Biometeorology,
58(9), 1919–1925. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00484-014-0794-8.
Tork. (2021, June 14). Employees are still
skipping lunch despite working from
home, new Tork survey finds.
Torkusa.Com. https://www.torkusa.com/
press-releases/tork-takes-back-lunchbreak.
Torres, P.A., Helmstetter, J.A., Kaye, A.M., &
Kaye, A.D. (2015). Rhabdomyolysis:
Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment.
The Oschner Journal, 15(1), 58–69.
Trangmar, S.J., & González-Alonso, J. (2017).
New Insights Into the Impact of
Dehydration on Blood Flow and
Metabolism During Exercise. Exercise
and Sport Sciences Reviews, 45(3), 146–
153. https://doi.org/10.1249/JES.00000
00000000109.
Tseng, M.-F., Chou, C.-L., Chung, C.-H.,
Chen, Y.-K., Chien, W.-C., Feng, C.-H., &
Chu, P. (2020). Risk of chronic kidney
disease in patients with heat injury: A
nationwide longitudinal cohort study in
Taiwan. PLOS ONE, 15(7), e0235607.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0235607.
Turk, M.F. (2018). A History of Occupational
Health and Safety: From 1905 to the
Present (1st ed.). University of Nevada
Press.
Tustin, A.W., Cannon, D.L., Arbury, S.B.,
Thomas, R.J., & Hodgson, M.J. (2018a).
Risk Factors for Heat-Related Illness in
U.S. Workers: An OSHA Case Series.
Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 60(8), e383–
e389. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.00000
00000001365.
Tustin, A.W., Lamson, G.E., Jacklitsch, B.L.,
Thomas, R.J., Arbury, S.B., Cannon, D.L.,
Gonzales, R.G., & Hodgson, M.J. (2018b).
Evaluation of Occupational Exposure
Limits for Heat Stress in Outdoor
Workers—United States, 2011–2016.
MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 67(26), 733–737. https://doi.org/
10.15585/mmwr.mm6726a1.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974).
Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics
and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–
1131.
Uchiyama, K., King, J., Wallman, K., Taggart,
S., Dugan, C., & Girard, O. (2022). The
PO 00000
Frm 00370
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
influence of rest break frequency and
duration on physical performance and
psychophysiological responses: A
mining simulation study. European
Journal of Applied Physiology, 122(9),
2087–2097. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00421-022-04979-3.
United States Geological Survey (USGS).
(2019). Evaporation and the Water Cycle.
www.usgs.gov/special-topics/waterscience-school/science/evaporation-andwater-cycle#overview.
University of Groningen, & University of
California, Davis. (2024). Share of Labour
Compensation in GDP at Current
National Prices for United States
[LABSHPUSA156NRUG], retrieved from
FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/
LABSHPUSA156NRUG.
Urdaz, J.H., Overton, M.W., Moore, D.A., &
Santos, J.E.P. (2006). Technical Note:
Effects of Adding Shade and Fans to a
Feedbunk Sprinkler System for
Preparturient Cows on Health and
Performance. Journal of Dairy Science,
89(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3168/
jds.S0022-0302(06)72267-6.
Uribarri, J. (2020). Chronic kidney disease
and kidney stones. Current Opinion in
Nephrology and Hypertension, 29(2),
237–242. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNH.
0000000000000582.
USVI Governor’s Office. (2024). USVI
Proposed Executive Budget FY23 &
FY24. https://www.vi.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2022/06/2023-2024-finalbudget-book.pdf.
Vaidyanathan, A., Malilay, J., Schramm, P., &
Saha, S. (2020). Heat-Related Deaths—
United States, 2004–2018. Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR),
69(24).
Vaidyanathan, A., Saha, S., Vicedo-Cabrera,
A.M., Gasparrini, A., Abdurehman, N.,
Jordan, R., Hawkins, M., Hess, J., &
Elixhauser, A. (2019). Assessment of
extreme heat and hospitalizations to
inform early warning systems.
Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 116(12), 5420–5427. https://
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806393116.
Van der Walt, W., & Strydom, N. (1975).
Mortality rate due to heat stroke for the
period 1930–1974 and the influence of
heat acclimatization (29/75). Chamber of
Mines of South Africa Research
Organization.
Van Lieshout, J.J., Wieling, W., Karemaker,
J.M., & Secher, N.H. (2003). Syncope,
cerebral perfusion, and oxygenation.
Journal of Applied Physiology, 94(3),
833–848. https://doi.org/10.1152/
japplphysiol.00260.2002.
Vanos, J., Vecellio, D.J., & Kjellstrom, T.
(2019). Workplace heat exposure, health
protection, and economic impacts: A
case study in Canada. American Journal
of Industrial Medicine, 62(12), 1024–
1037. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.
22966.
Varghese, B.M., Hansen, A., Bi, P., &
Pisaniello, D. (2018). Are workers at risk
of occupational injuries due to heat
exposure? A comprehensive literature
review. Safety Science, 110, 380–392.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.
04.027.
Varghese, B.M., Hansen, A.L., Williams, S.,
Bi, P., Hanson-Easey, S., Barnett, A.G.,
Heyworth, J.S., Sim, M.R., Rowett, S.,
Nitschke, M., Di Corleto, R., & Pisaniello,
D.L. (2020). Determinants of heat-related
injuries in Australian workplaces:
Perceptions of health and safety
professionals. Science of The Total
Environment, 718, 137138. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137138.
Venugopal, V., Latha, P.K., Shanmugam, R.,
Krishnamoorthy, M., Srinivasan, K.,
Perumal, K., & Chinnadurai, J.S. (2020).
Risk of kidney stone among workers
exposed to high occupational heat
stress—A case study from southern
Indian steel industry. Science of The
Total Environment, 722, 137619. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137619.
Vicario, S.J., Okabajue, R., & Haltom, T.
(1986). Rapid cooling in classic
heatstroke: Effect on mortality rates. The
American Journal of Emergency
Medicine, 4(5), 394–398. https://doi.org/
10.1016/0735-6757(86)90185-3.
Viscusi, W.K., & Gentry, E.P. (2015). The
value of a statistical life for
transportation regulations: A test of the
benefits transfer methodology. Journal of
Risk and Uncertainty, 51(1), 53–77.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-0159219-2.
Wadsworth, G., Courville, M., & Schenker, M.
(2019). Pay, Power, and Health: HRI and
the Agricultural Conundrum. Labor
Studies Journal, 44(3), 214–235. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0160449X18767749.
Waikar, S.S., & Bonventre, J.V. (2009).
Creatinine Kinetics and the Definition of
Acute Kidney Injury. Journal of the
American Society of Nephrology, 20(3),
672–679. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.
2008070669.
Waites, G.M.H. (1991). Thermoregulation of
the scrotum and testis: Studies in
animals and significance for man.
Temperature and Environmental Effects
on the Testis, 9–17.
Wallace, R.F. (2003). Risk Factors and
Mortality in Relation to Heat Illness
Severity (USARIEM TECHNICAL
REPORT T–03/14). U.S. Army Research
Institute of Environmental Medicine.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/
ADA416199.pdf.
Wallace, R.F., Kriebel, D., Punnett, L.,
Wegman, D.H., & Amoroso, P.J. (2007).
Prior heat illness hospitalization and risk
of early death. Environmental Research,
104(2), 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envres.2007.01.003.
Wallace, R.F., Kriebel, D., Punnett, L.,
Wegman, D.H., Wenger, C.B., Gardner,
J.W., & Gonzalez, R.R. (2005). The Effects
of Continuous Hot Weather Training on
Risk of Exertional Heat Illness: Medicine
& Science in Sports & Exercise, 37(1),
84–90. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.
0000150018.90213.AA.
Walmart, Inc. (2024). Reddy Ice Premium
Packaged Ice—7lbs Bag. Walmart.com.
Walter, E.J., & Carraretto, M. (2016). The
neurological and cognitive consequences
of hyperthermia. Critical Care, 20(1),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
199. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-0161376-4.
Wang, F., Zhang, Y., Li, J., Xia, H., Zhang, D.,
& Yao, S. (2022). The pathogenesis and
therapeutic strategies of heat strokeinduced liver injury. Critical Care, 26(1),
391. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-02204273-w.
Wang, J.-C., Chien, W.-C., Chu, P., Chung, C.H., Lin, C.-Y., & Tsai, S.-H. (2019). The
association between heat stroke and
subsequent cardiovascular diseases.
PLOS ONE, 14(2), e0211386. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211386.
Ward, M.D., King, M.A., Gabrial, C.,
Kenefick, R.W., & Leon, L.R. (2020).
Biochemical recovery from exertional
heat stroke follows a 16-day time course.
PLOS ONE, 15(3), e0229616. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229616.
Washington Department of Labor and
Industries. (2023). Final Cost-Benefit
Analysis & Significant Legislative Rule
Analysis. Washington Department of
Labor and Industries. https://
www.lni.wa.gov/rulemaking-activity/
AO21-33/2133FCBA.pdf.
Watanabe, S., Shimomura, T., & Miyazaki, H.
(2009). Thermal evaluation of a chair
with fans as an individually controlled
system. Building and Environment,
44(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.buildenv.2008.05.016.
Watkins, E.R., Hayes, M., Watt, P., &
Richardson, A.J. (2019). Heat tolerance of
Fire Service Instructors. Journal of
Thermal Biology, 82, 1–9. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2019.03.005.
Watson, K.B., Carlson, S.A., Loustalot, F.,
Town, M., Eke, P.I., Thomas, C.W., &
Greenlund, K.J. (2022). Chronic
Conditions Among Adults Aged 18–34
Years—United States, 2019. MMWR.
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,
71(30), 964–970. https://doi.org/
10.15585/mmwr.mm7130a3.
WebstaurantStore. (2024). Tornado 20″
Industrial 3-Speed High-Velocity
Oscillating Metal Pedestal Fan.
WebstaurantStore.com.
Wee, J., Tan, X.R., Gunther, S.H., Ihsan, M.,
Leow, M.K.S., Tan, D.S.-Y., Eriksson,
J.G., & Lee, J.K.W. (2023). Effects of
Medications on Heat Loss Capacity in
Chronic Disease Patients: Health
Implications Amidst Global Warming.
Pharmacological Reviews, 75(6), 1140–
1166. https://doi.org/10.1124/pharmrev.
122.000782.
Wegman, D. (2023). Communication with
David Wegman on November 15, 2023.
Wegman, D.H., Apelqvist, J., Bottai, M.,
Ekström, U., Garcı́a-Trabanino, R.,
Glaser, J., Hogstedt, C., Jakobsson, K.,
Jarquı́n, E., Lucas, R.A.I., Weiss, I.,
Wesseling, C., Bodin, T., & The Work
Health and Efficiency (WE) Program
Working Group. (2018). Intervention to
diminish dehydration and kidney
damage among sugarcane workers.
Scandinavian Journal of Work,
Environment & Health, 44(1), 16–24.
https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3659.
Weil, D. (2014). The Fissured Workplace.
Harvard University Press.
Weinberger, K.R., Harris, D., Spangler, K.R.,
Zanobetti, A., & Wellenius, G.A. (2020).
PO 00000
Frm 00371
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71067
Estimating the number of excess deaths
attributable to heat in 297 United States
counties. Environmental Epidemiology,
4(3), e096. https://doi.org/10.1097/EE9.
0000000000000096.
Weiner, J.S. (1950). Observations on the
Working Ability of Bantu Mineworkers
with Reference to Acclimatization to Hot
Humid Conditions. Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 7(1), 17–26.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.7.1.17.
Wells, J.C.K. (2002). Thermal Environment
and Human Birth Weight. Journal of
Theoretical Biology, 214(3), 413–425.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.2001.2465.
Wenzel, F.G., & Horn, T.D. (1998).
Nonneoplastic disorders of the eccrine
glands. Journal of the American
Academy of Dermatology, 38(1), 1–20.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S01909622(98)70532-8.
Wesdock, J.C., & Donoghue, A.M. (2019).
Life-threatening heat-related illness with
severe hyponatremia in an aluminum
smelter worker. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 62(12), 1068–1075.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23061.
Wesseling, C., Aragón, A., González, M.,
Weiss, I., Glaser, J., Bobadilla, N.A.,
Roncal-Jiménez, C., Correa-Rotter, R.,
Johnson, R.J., & Barregard, L. (2016).
Kidney function in sugarcane cutters in
Nicaragua—A longitudinal study of
workers at risk of Mesoamerican
nephropathy. Environmental Research,
147, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envres.2016.02.002.
Wexelman, B.A., Eden, E., & Rose, K.M.
(2013). Survey of New York City
Resident Physicians on Cause-of-Death
Reporting, 2010. Preventing Chronic
Disease, 10, 120288. https://doi.org/
10.5888/pcd10.120288.
Whitman, S., Good, G., Donoghue, E.R.,
Benbow, N., Shou, W., & Mou, S. (1997).
Mortality in Chicago attributed to the
July 1995 heat wave. American Journal
of Public Health, 87(9), 1515–1518.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.87.9.1515.
Wiatrowski, W. (2014, June). Examining the
completeness of occupational injury and
illness data: An update on current
research. Monthly Labor Review. https://
www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2014/article/pdf/
examining-the-completeness-ofoccupational-injury-and-illness-data-anupdate-on-current-research.pdf.
Wilson, A.J., Bressler, R.D., Ivanovich, C.,
Tuholske, C., Raymond, C., Horton, R.M.,
Sobel, A., Kinney, P., & Shrader, J.G.
(2024). Age-dependent vulnerability to
humid heat: Evidence from wet-bulb
temperature exposure. https://
static1.squarespace.com/static/
5e47fa157fcd934d19bbfa65/t/
6595ebe8e1f3877c9b0dc45c/
1704324077819/wilson_bressler_etal_
humid_heat.pdf.
Wilson, T.E., Cui, J., Zhang, R., & Crandall,
C.G. (2006). Heat stress reduces cerebral
blood velocity and markedly impairs
orthostatic tolerance in humans.
American Journal of PhysiologyRegulatory, Integrative and Comparative
Physiology, 291(5), R1443–R1448.
https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00712.
2005.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71068
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Wing, J.F. (1965). A Review of the effects of
high ambient temp on mental
performance. Aerospace Medical
Research Laboratories. Aerospace
Medical Division. Air Force Systems
Command. Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, Ohio.
Wong, B.J., & Hollowed, C.G. (2017). Current
concepts of active vasodilation in human
skin. Temperature, 4(1), 41–59. https://
doi.org/10.1080/23328940.2016.1200203.
Woolf, S., Morina, J., French, E., Funk, A.,
Sabo, R., Fong, S., Hoffman, J., Chapman,
D., & Krist, A. (2023). The Health Care
Costs of Extreme Heat. The Center for
American Progress. https://
www.americanprogress.org/article/thehealth-care-costs-of-extreme-heat/.
Workers Defense Project. (2013). Build a
Better Texas: Construction Working
Conditions in the Lone Star State.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2004).
International statistical classification of
diseases and related health problems
(10th revision, 2nd edition).
World Health Organization (WHO). (2016).
International statistical classification of
diseases and related health problems
(10th revision, 5th edition).
World Health Organization (WHO). (2019).
ICD–11 Implementation or Transition
Guide.
Wright Beatty, H.E., Keillor, J.M., Hardcastle,
S.G., Boulay, P., & Kenny, G.P. (2015).
Preservation of Cognitive Performance
with Age during Exertional Heat Stress
under Low and High Air Velocity.
BioMed Research International, 2015, 1–
10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/619103.
Wu, M., Wang, C., Liu, Z., Zhong, L., Yu, B.,
Cheng, B., & Liu, Z. (2021). Clinical
Characteristics and Risk Factors
Associated With Acute Kidney Injury
Inpatient With Exertional Heatstroke: An
Over 10-Year Intensive Care Survey.
Frontiers in Medicine, 8, 678434. https://
doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.678434.
Wu, X., Brady, J.E., Rosenberg, H., & Li, G.
(2014). Emergency Department Visits for
Heat Stroke in the United States, 2009
and 2010. Injury Epidemiology, 1(1), 8.
https://doi.org/10.1186/2197-1714-1-8.
Wuellner, S.E., Adams, D.A., & Bonauto, D.K.
(2016). Unreported workers’
compensation claims to the BLS Survey
of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses:
Establishment factors. American Journal
of Industrial Medicine, 59(4), 274–289.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22563.
Wuellner, S.E., & Bonauto, D.K. (2014).
Exploring the relationship between
employer recordkeeping and
underreporting in the BLS Survey of
Occupational Injuries and Illnesses.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
57(10), 1133–1143. https://doi.org/
10.1002/ajim.22350.
Wuellner, S., & Phipps, P. (2018). Employer
knowledge of federal requirements for
recording work-related injuries and
illnesses: Implications for occupational
injury surveillance data. American
Journal of Industrial Medicine, 61(5),
422–435. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.
22824.
W.W. Grainger, Inc. (2024). 32 qt Cooler
Capacity. Grainger.com.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Wyndham, C.H. (1969). Adaptation to heat
and cold. Environmental Research, 2(5–
6), 442–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0013-9351(69)90015-2.
Wyndham, C., Strydom, N.B., Morrison, J.F.,
Dutoit, F.D., & Kraan, J.G. (1954). A new
method of acclimatization to heat.
Arbeitsphysiologie, 15(5), 373–382.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00935938.
Wyndham, C., Strydom, N., Williams, C.,
Morrison, J., & Bredell, G. (1966). The
heat reactions of bantu males in various
states of acclimatization. Int. Z. Angew.
Physiol. Einschl. Arbeitsphysiol., 23, 79–
92.
Wyss, C.R., Brengelmann, G.L., Johnson, J.M.,
Rowell, L.B., & Niederberger, M. (1974).
Control of skin blood flow sweating and
heart rate role of skin vs. core
temperature. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 36(6), 726–733.
Xiang, J., Bi, P., Pisaniello, D., & Hansen, A.
(2014a). Health Impacts of Workplace
Heat Exposure: An Epidemiological
Review. Industrial Health, 52(2), 91–101.
https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.20120145.
Xiang, J., Bi, P., Pisaniello, D., Hansen, A., &
Sullivan, T. (2014b). Association
between high temperature and workrelated injuries in Adelaide, South
Australia, 2001–2010. Occupational &
Environmental Medicine, 71(4), 246–252.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2013101584.
Xu, J. (2012). QuickStats: Number of HeatRelated Deaths, by Sex—National Vital
Statistics System, United States, 1999–
2010. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, 61(36), 729.
Yaglou, C.P., & Minard, D. (1957). Control of
heat casualties at military training
centers. Archives of Industrial Health,
16(4), 302–316.
Yeoman, K., Weakley, A., DuBose, W., Honn,
K., McMurry, T., Eiter, B., . . . & Poplin,
G. (2022). Effects of heat strain on
cognitive function among a sample of
miners. Applied ergonomics, 102,
103743.
Yi, W., & Chan, A. (2017). Effects of Heat
Stress on Construction Labor
Productivity in Hong Kong: A Case
Study of Rebar Workers. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 14(9), 1055. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14091055.
Yi, W., & Chan, A.P.C. (2013). Optimizing
work-rest schedule for construction rebar
workers in hot and humid environment.
Building and Environment, 61, 104–113.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.
2012.12.012.
Yüzen, D., Graf, I., Tallarek, A.-C., Hollwitz,
B., Wiessner, C., Schleussner, E.,
Stammer, D., Padula, A., Hecher, K.,
Arck, P.C., & Diemert, A. (2023).
Increased late preterm birth risk and
altered uterine blood flow upon
exposure to heat stress. EBioMedicine,
93, 104651. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ebiom.2023.104651.
Zander, K.K., Botzen, W.J.W., Oppermann,
E., Kjellstrom, T., & Garnett, S.T. (2015).
Heat stress causes substantial labour
productivity loss in Australia. Nature
PO 00000
Frm 00372
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Climate Change, 5(7), 647–651. https://
doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2623.
Zeller, L., Novack, V., Barski, L., Jotkowitz,
A., & Almog, Y. (2011). Exertional
heatstroke: Clinical characteristics,
diagnostic and therapeutic
considerations. European Journal of
Internal Medicine, 22(3), 296–299.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2010.12.
013.
Zhang, H., Guo, F., Liu, K., Wang, J., Dong,
J., & Zhu, P. (2022). Spatial differences
in thermal comfort in summer in coastal
areas: A study on Dalian, China.
Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 1024757.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.
1024757.
Zhang, P., Deschenes, O., Meng, K., & Zhang,
J. (2018). Temperature effects on
productivity and factor reallocation:
Evidence from a half million chinese
manufacturing plants. Journal of
Environmental Economics and
Management, 88, 1–17. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jeem.2017.11.001.
Zhang, S., & Zhu, N. (2021). Exercise heat
acclimation causes human responses and
safety performance improvements.
Journal of Thermal Biology, 100, 103042.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2021.
103042.
Zhang, W., Ding, N., Han, Y., He, J., & Zhang,
N. (2023). The impact of temperature on
labor productivity—Evidence from
temperature-sensitive enterprises.
Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10,
1039668. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.
2022.1039668.
Zhang, X., Chen, X., & Zhang, X. (2024).
Temperature and Low-Stakes Cognitive
Performance. Journal of the Association
of Environmental and Resource
Economists, 11(1), 75–96.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 1910,
1915, 1917, 1918, 1926, and 1928
Heat-related injuries and illnesses,
Heat stress, Incorporation by reference,
Occupational safety and health, Safety.
Signed at Washington, DC.
Douglas L. Parker,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
Amendments to Standards
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, OSHA proposes to amend 29
CFR parts 1910, 1915, 1917, 1918, 1926,
and 1928 as follows:
PART 1910—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY
AND HEALTH STANDARDS
Subpart A—General
1. The authority citation for part 1910,
subpart A, is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657;
Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR
8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR
35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111),
3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67 FR 65008),
5–2007 (72 FR 31159), 4–2010 (75 FR 55355),
1–2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8–2020 (85 FR
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
58393), as applicable. Sections 1910.6,
1910.7, 1910.8 and 1910.9 also issued under
29 CFR 1911. Section 1910.7(f) also issued
under 31 U.S.C. 9701; 29 U.S.C. 9a; 5 U.S.C.
553; Public Law 106–113 (113 Stat. 1501A–
222); Public Law 11–8 and 111–317; and
OMB Circular A–25 (dated July 8, 1993) (58
FR 38142, July 15, 1993).
2. Amend § 1910.6 to subpart A by
revising the introductory text of
paragraph (z) and adding paragraph
(z)(4) to read as follows:
■
§ 1910.6
Incorporation by reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(z) National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH), 1600 Clifton
Road, Atlanta, GA 30329; website:
www.cdc.gov/niosh.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) NIOSH Publication No. 2016–106.
Criteria for a Recommended Standard:
Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments, February 2016; IBR
approved for § 1910.148(b).
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart J—General Environmental
Controls
3. The authority citation for part 1910,
subpart J, is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657;
Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR
8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR
35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111),
3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67 FR 65008),
5–2007 (72 FR 31159), 4–2010 (75 FR 55355),
1–2012 (77 FR 3912) or 8–2020 (85 FR
58393), as applicable.
Sections 1910.141, 1910.142, 1910.145,
1910.146, 1910.147, and 1910.148 also issued
under 29 CFR part 1911.
4. Add § 1910.148 to subpart J to read
as follows:
■
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 1910.148 Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention.
(a) Scope and application. (1) Except
as otherwise provided in this paragraph
(a), this standard applies to all
employers.
(2) This standard does not apply to
the following:
(i) Work activities for which there is
no reasonable expectation of exposure at
or above the initial heat trigger;
(ii) Short duration employee
exposures at or above the initial heat
trigger of 15 minutes or less in any 60minute period;
(iii) Organizations whose primary
function is the performance of
firefighting; emergency response
activities of workplace emergency
response teams, emergency medical
services, or technical search and rescue;
and any emergency response activities
already covered under 29 CFR 1910.120,
1910.146, 1910.156, part 1915, subpart
P, 1926.65, and 1926.1211;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(iv) Work activities performed in
indoor work areas or vehicles where airconditioning consistently keeps the
ambient temperature below 80 °F;
(v) Telework (i.e., work done from
home or another remote location of the
employee’s choosing); and
(vi) Sedentary work activities at
indoor work areas that only involve
some combination of the following:
sitting, occasional standing and walking
for brief periods of time, and occasional
lifting of objects weighing less than 10
pounds.
(3) Employers whose employees all
exclusively perform activities described
in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (vi) of
this section are exempt from this
standard.
(b) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this standard:
Acclimatization means the body’s
adaptation to work in the heat as a
person is exposed to heat gradually over
time, which reduces the strain caused
by heat stress and enables a person to
work with less chance of heat illness or
injury.
Ambient temperature means the
temperature of the air surrounding a
body. It is also called ‘‘air temperature’’
or ‘‘dry bulb temperature.’’
Cooling personal protective
equipment (PPE) means equipment
worn to protect the user against heat
injury or illness.
Heat index means the National
Weather Service heat index, which
combines ambient temperature and
humidity.
High heat trigger means a heat index
of 90 °F or a wet bulb globe temperature
equal to the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) Recommended Exposure Limit
(REL).
Indoor/indoors means an area under a
ceiling or overhead covering that
restricts airflow and has along its entire
perimeter walls, doors, windows,
dividers, or other physical barriers that
restrict airflow, whether open or closed.
Initial heat trigger means a heat index
of 80 °F or a wet bulb globe temperature
equal to the NIOSH Recommended Alert
Limit (RAL).
Outdoor/outdoors means an area that
is not indoors. For purposes of this
standard, vehicles operated outdoors are
considered outdoor work areas unless
exempted by paragraph (a)(2) of this
section.
Radiant heat means heat transferred
by electromagnetic waves between
surfaces. Sources of radiant heat include
the sun, hot objects, hot liquids, hot
surfaces, and fire.
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL)
means the NIOSH-recommended heat
PO 00000
Frm 00373
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71069
stress alert limits for unacclimatized
workers, see NIOSH Publication No.
2016–106 (incorporated by reference,
see § 1910.6).
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL)
means the NIOSH-recommended heat
stress exposure limits for acclimatized
workers, see NIOSH Publication No.
2016–106 (incorporated by reference,
see § 1910.6).
Shade means the blockage of direct
sunlight, such that objects do not cast a
shadow in the area of blocked sunlight.
Signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
that requires emergency response and
includes loss of consciousness (i.e.,
fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be
accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or
bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting
irrationally or disoriented, having
convulsions, and (even after resting)
having an elevated heart rate.
Signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness
and includes headache, nausea,
weakness, dizziness, elevated body
temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms.
Vapor-impermeable clothing means
full-body clothing that significantly
inhibits or completely prevents sweat
produced by the body from evaporating
into the outside air. Examples include
encapsulating suits, various forms of
chemical resistant suits, and other forms
of nonbreathable PPE.
Vehicle means a car, truck, van, or
other motorized means of transporting
people or goods.
Wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT)
means a heat metric that takes into
account ambient temperature, humidity,
radiant heat from sunlight or artificial
heat sources, and air movement.
Work area means an area where one
or more employees are working within
a work site.
Work site means a physical location
(e.g., fixed, mobile) where the
employer’s work or operations are
performed.
(c) Heat injury and illness prevention
plan. (1) The employer must develop
and implement a work site heat injury
and illness prevention plan (HIIPP) with
site-specific information.
(2) The HIIPP must include:
(i) A comprehensive list of the types
of work activities covered by the plan;
(ii) All policies and procedures
necessary to comply with the
requirements of this standard; and
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71070
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(iii) An identification of the heat
metric (i.e., heat index or wet bulb globe
temperature) the employer will monitor
to comply with paragraph (d) of this
section.
(3) If the employer has employees
who wear vapor-impermeable clothing,
the employer must evaluate heat stress
hazards resulting from these clothing
and implement policies and procedures
based on reputable sources to protect
employees while wearing these
clothing. The employer must include
these policies and procedures and
document the evaluation in the HIIPP.
(4) If the employer has more than 10
employees, the HIIPP must be written.
(5) The employer must designate one
or more heat safety coordinators to
implement and monitor the HIIPP. The
identity of the heat safety coordinator(s)
must be documented in any written
HIIPP. The heat safety coordinator(s)
must have the authority to ensure
compliance with all aspects of the
HIIPP.
(6) The employer must seek the input
and involvement of non-managerial
employees and their representatives, if
any, in the development and
implementation of the HIIPP.
(7) The employer must review and
evaluate the effectiveness of the HIIPP
whenever a heat-related illness or injury
occurs that results in death, days away
from work, medical treatment beyond
first aid, or loss of consciousness, but at
least annually. Following each review,
the employer must update the HIIPP as
necessary. The employer must seek
input and involvement of nonmanagerial employees and their
representatives, if any, during any
reviews and updates.
(8) The employer must make the
HIIPP readily available at the work site
to all employees performing work at the
work site.
(9) The HIIPP must be available in a
language each employee, supervisor,
and heat safety coordinator
understands.
(d) Identifying heat hazards—(1)
Outdoor work. The employer must
monitor heat conditions at outdoor work
areas by:
(i) Tracking local heat index forecasts
provided by the National Weather
Service or other reputable sources; or
(ii) At or as close as possible to the
work area(s), measuring the following:
(A) Heat index, or ambient
temperature and humidity measured
separately to calculate heat index; or
(B) Wet bulb globe temperature.
(2) Frequency of outdoor monitoring.
The employer must monitor with
sufficient frequency to determine with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
reasonable accuracy employees’
exposure to heat.
(3) Indoor work. (i) At indoor work
sites, the employer must identify each
work area(s) where there is a reasonable
expectation that employees are or may
be exposed to heat at or above the initial
heat trigger.
(ii) The employer must develop and
implement a monitoring plan covering
each work area identified in paragraph
(d)(3)(i) of this section to determine
when employees are exposed to heat at
or above the initial and high heat
triggers. The employer must include the
monitoring plan in the HIIPP and the
monitoring plan must include
measuring one of the following at or as
close as possible to the work area(s)
identified in paragraph (d)(3)(i) of this
section:
(A) Heat index, or ambient
temperature and humidity measured
separately to calculate heat index; or
(B) Wet bulb globe temperature.
(iii) Whenever there is a change in
production, processes, equipment,
controls, or a substantial increase in
outdoor temperature which has the
potential to increase heat exposure
indoors, the employer must evaluate
any affected work area(s) to identify
where there is reasonable expectation
that employees are or may be exposed
to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger. The employer must update their
monitoring plan or develop and
implement a monitoring plan, in
accordance with paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of
this section, to account for any increases
in heat exposure.
(iv) The employer must seek the input
and involvement of non-managerial
employees and their representatives, if
any, when evaluating the work site to
identify work areas with a reasonable
expectation of exposures at or above the
initial heat trigger and in developing
and updating monitoring plans in
accordance with paragraphs (d)(3)(i)
through (iii) of this section.
(4) Heat metric. The heat metric the
employer chooses to monitor will
determine the applicable initial and
high heat triggers for purposes of this
standard. If the employer does not
identify their choice of heat metric in
the HIIPP or monitor as required by
paragraph (d) of this section, the initial
and high heat triggers will be the heat
index values identified in the
definitions.
(5) Exemption from monitoring. The
employer can assume that the
temperature at a work area is at or above
both the initial heat and high heat
triggers instead of conducting on-site
measurements or tracking local
forecasts. In such cases, the employer
PO 00000
Frm 00374
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
must provide all control measures
outlined in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this
section.
(e) Requirements at or above the
initial heat trigger—(1) Timing. The
employer must implement the controls
described in this paragraph (e) when
employees are exposed to heat at or
above the initial heat trigger.
(2) Drinking water. The employer
must provide access to potable water for
drinking that is:
(i) Placed in locations readily
accessible to the employee;
(ii) Suitably cool; and
(iii) Of sufficient quantity to provide
access to 1 quart of drinking water per
employee per hour.
Note 1 to paragraph (e)(2). The
requirements of this paragraph (e)(2) are in
addition to the requirements in the sanitation
standard applicable to the employer (29 CFR
1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127, 1918.95,
1926.51, 1928.110) and the temporary labor
camps standard (29 CFR 1910.142).
(3) Break area(s) at outdoor work
sites. The employer must provide one or
more area(s) for employees to take
breaks that can accommodate the
number of employees on break, is
readily accessible to the work area(s),
and has at least one of the following:
(i) Artificial shade (e.g., tent, pavilion)
or natural shade (e.g., trees), but not
shade from equipment, that provides
blockage of direct sunlight and is open
to the outside air; or
(ii) Air-conditioning, if in an enclosed
space like a trailer, vehicle, or structure.
(4) Break area(s) at indoor work sites.
The employer must provide one or more
area(s) for employees to take breaks
(e.g., break room) that is air-conditioned
or has increased air movement and, if
appropriate, de-humidification, can
accommodate the number of employees
on break, and is readily accessible to the
work area(s).
(5) Indoor work area controls. The
employer must provide one of the
following at each work area identified in
paragraph (d)(3)(i) of this section:
(i) Increased air movement, such as
fans or comparable natural ventilation,
and, if appropriate, de-humidification;
(ii) Air-conditioned work area; or
(iii) In cases of radiant heat sources,
other measures that effectively reduce
employee exposure to radiant heat in
the work area (e.g., shielding/barriers,
isolating heat sources).
(6) Evaluation of fan use. At ambient
temperatures above 102 °F, if the
employer is providing fans to comply
with paragraph (e)(4) or (5) of this
section, the employer must evaluate the
humidity to determine if fan use is
harmful, and if the employer determines
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
that it is, the employer must discontinue
fan use.
(7) Acclimatization—(i) New
employees. The employer must
implement one of the following
acclimatization protocols for each
employee during their first week on the
job:
(A) A plan that, at minimum,
incorporates the measures in paragraph
(f) of this section whenever the heat
index is at or above the initial heat
trigger during the employee’s first week
of work; or
(B) Gradual acclimatization to heat in
which the employee’s exposure to heat
is restricted to no more than: 20% of a
normal work shift exposure duration on
the first day of work, 40% on the second
day of work, 60% of the third day of
work, and 80% on the fourth day of
work.
(ii) Returning employees. The
employer must implement one of the
following acclimatization protocols for
each employee who has been away (e.g.,
on vacation or sick leave) for more than
14 days during their first week back on
the job:
(A) A plan that, at minimum,
incorporates the measures in paragraph
(f) of this section whenever the heat
index is at or above the initial heat
trigger during the employee’s first week
upon returning to work; or
(B) Gradual acclimatization to heat in
which employee exposure to heat is
restricted to no more than: 50% of a
normal work shift exposure duration on
the first day of work, 60% on the second
day of work, and 80% of the third day
of work.
(iii) Exception to acclimatization
requirements. The requirements of
paragraphs (e)(7)(i) and (ii) of this
section do not apply if the employer can
demonstrate the employee consistently
worked under the same or similar
conditions as the employer’s working
conditions within the prior 14 days.
(8) Rest breaks if needed. The
employer must allow and encourage
employees to take paid rest breaks in the
break area required by paragraph (e)(3)
or (4) of this section if needed to prevent
overheating.
(9) Effective communication. The
employer must maintain a means of
effective, two-way communication with
employees (e.g., by voice or electronic
means (such as a handheld transceiver,
phone, or radio)) and regularly
communicate with employees.
(10) Personal protective equipment
(PPE). If the employer provides
employees with cooling PPE, the
employer must ensure the cooling
properties of the PPE are maintained at
all times during use.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(f) Requirements at or above the high
heat trigger—(1) Timing. In addition to
the controls required by paragraph (e) of
this section, the employer must
implement the controls described in this
paragraph (f) when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the high
heat trigger.
(2) Rest breaks. The employer must
provide employees a minimum 15minute paid rest break at least every two
hours in the break area required by
paragraph (e)(3) or (4) of this section,
subject to the following:
(i) A meal break may count as a rest
break, even if it is not otherwise
required by law to be paid;
(ii) Periods during which employees
are donning and doffing personal
protective equipment (e.g., coveralls)
must not count towards the total time
provided for rest breaks; and
(iii) The time for employees to walk
to and from the break area is not
included in the time provided for rest
breaks.
(3) Observation for signs and
symptoms. The employer must
implement at least one of the following
methods of observing employees for
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness:
(i) A mandatory buddy system in
which co-workers observe each other; or
(ii) Observation by a supervisor or
heat safety coordinator, with no more
than 20 employees observed per
supervisor or heat safety coordinator.
(iii) For employees who are alone at
a work site, the employer must maintain
a means of effective, two-way
communication with those employees
(e.g., by electronic means (such as a
handheld transceiver, phone, or radio))
and make contact with the employees at
least every two hours.
(4) Hazard Alert. Prior to the work
shift or upon determining the high heat
trigger is met or exceeded, the employer
must notify employees of the following:
(i) The importance of drinking plenty
of water;
(ii) Employees’ right to, at employees’
election, take rest breaks if needed and
the rest breaks required by paragraph
(f)(2) of this section;
(iii) How to seek help and the
procedures to take in a heat emergency;
and
(iv) For mobile work sites, the
location of break area(s) required by
paragraph (e)(3) or (4) of this section
and drinking water required by
paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
(5) Excessively high heat areas. The
employer must place warning signs at
indoor work areas with ambient
temperatures that regularly exceed
120 °F. The warning signs must be
PO 00000
Frm 00375
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71071
legible, visible, and understandable to
employees entering the work areas.
(g) Heat illness and emergency
response and planning. (1) As part of
their HIIPP, the employer must develop
and implement a heat emergency
response plan that includes:
(i) A list of emergency phone numbers
(e.g., 911, emergency services);
(ii) A description of how employees
can contact a supervisor and emergency
medical services;
(iii) Individual(s) designated to ensure
that heat emergency procedures are
invoked when appropriate;
(iv) A description of how to transport
employees to a place where they can be
reached by an emergency medical
provider;
(v) Clear and precise directions to the
work site, including the address of the
work site, which can be provided to
emergency dispatchers; and
(vi) Procedures for responding to an
employee experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness,
including heat emergency procedures
for responding to an employee with
suspected heat stroke.
(2) If an employee is experiencing
signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness, the employer must:
(i) Relieve them from duty;
(ii) Monitor them;
(iii) Ensure they are not left alone;
(iv) Offer them on-site first aid or
medical services before ending
monitoring; and
(v) Provide them with the means to
reduce their body temperature.
(3) If an employee is experiencing
signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency, the employer must:
(i) Take immediate actions to reduce
the employee’s body temperature before
emergency medical services arrive;
(ii) Contact emergency medical
services immediately; and
(iii) Perform activities described in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(h) Training—(1) Initial training. Prior
to any work at or above the initial heat
trigger, the employer must ensure that
each employee receives training on, and
understands, the following:
(i) Heat stress hazards;
(ii) Heat-related injuries and illnesses;
(iii) Risk factors for heat-related injury
or illness, including the contributions of
physical exertion, clothing, personal
protective equipment, a lack of
acclimatization, and personal risk
factors (e.g., age, health, alcohol
consumption, and use of certain
medications);
(iv) Signs and symptoms of heatrelated illness and which ones require
immediate emergency action;
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
71072
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(v) The importance of removing
personal protective equipment that may
impair cooling during rest breaks;
(vi) Importance of taking rest breaks to
prevent heat-related illness or injury,
and that rest breaks are paid;
(vii) Importance of drinking water to
prevent heat-related illness or injury;
(viii) The location of break areas;
(ix) The location of employerprovided water;
(x) The importance of employees
reporting any signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness they may
experience, and those they observe in
co-workers;
(xi) All policies and procedures that
are applicable to the employee’s duties,
as indicated in the work site’s HIIPP;
(xii) The identity of the heat safety
coordinator(s);
(xiii) The requirements of this
standard;
(xiv) How the employee can access
the work site’s HIIPP; and
(xv) Employees have a right to the
protections required by this standard
(e.g., rest breaks, water) and employers
are prohibited from discharging or in
any manner discriminating against any
employee for exercising those rights.
(xvi) If the employer is required by
paragraph (f)(5) of this section to place
warning signs for excessively high heat
areas, they must train employees in the
procedures to follow when working in
these areas.
(2) Supervisor training. The employer
must ensure that each supervisor
responsible for supervising employees
performing any work at or above the
initial heat trigger and each heat safety
coordinator receives training on, and
understands, both the topics outlined in
paragraph (h)(1) of this section and the
following:
(i) The policies and procedures
developed to comply with the
applicable requirements of this
standard, including the policies and
procedures for monitoring heat
conditions developed to comply with
paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(3)(ii) of this
section; and
(ii) The procedures the supervisor or
heat safety coordinator must follow if an
employee exhibits signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness.
(3) Annual refresher training. The
employer must ensure that each
employee receives annual training on,
and understands, the subjects addressed
in paragraph (h)(1) of this section. The
employer must also ensure that each
supervisor and heat safety coordinator
additionally receives annual training on,
and understands, the topics addressed
in paragraph (h)(2) of this section. For
employees who perform work outdoors,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
the employer must conduct the annual
refresher training before or at the start
of heat season.
(4) Supplemental training. The
employer must ensure that each
employee promptly receives, and
understands, additional training
whenever:
(i) Changes occur that affect the
employee’s exposure to heat at work
(e.g., new job tasks);
(ii) The employer changes the policies
or procedures addressed in paragraph
(h)(1)(xi) of this section;
(iii) There is an indication that the
employee has not retained the necessary
understanding; or
(iv) A heat-related injury or illness
occurs at the work site that results in
death, days away from work, medical
treatment beyond first aid, or loss of
consciousness.
(5) Presentation. Training must be
provided in a language and at a literacy
level each employee, supervisor, and
heat safety coordinator understands.
The employer must provide employees
with an opportunity for questions and
answers about the training materials.
(i) Recordkeeping. If the employer
conducts on-site measurements at
indoor work areas pursuant to
paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of this section, they
must have written or electronic records
of those indoor work area measurements
and retain those records for 6 months.
(j) Requirements implemented at no
cost to employees. The implementation
of all requirements of this standard must
be at no cost to employees, including
paying employees their normal rate of
pay when compliance requires
employee time.
(k) Dates—(1) Effective date. This
standard is effective [60 days after date
of publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register].
(2) Compliance date. Employers must
comply with all requirements of this
standard by [150 days after date of
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register].
(l) Severability. Each provision within
this standard is separate and severable
from the other provisions. If any
provision of this standard is held to be
invalid or unenforceable on its face, or
as applied to any person, entity, or
circumstance, or is stayed or enjoined,
that provision shall be construed so as
to continue to give the maximum effect
to the provision permitted by law,
unless such holding shall be one of utter
invalidity or unenforceability, in which
event the provision shall be severable
from this standard and shall not affect
the remainder of the standard.
PO 00000
Frm 00376
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
PART 1915—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY
AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR
SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT
5. The authority citation for part 1915
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 941; 29 U.S.C. 653,
655, 657; Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–
71 (36 FR 8754); 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83
(48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62
FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67
FR 65008), 5–2007 (72 FR 31160), 4–2010 (75
FR 55355), 1–2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8–2020
(85 FR 58393); 29 CFR part 1911; and 5
U.S.C. 553, as applicable.
Subpart F—General Working
Conditions
6. Add § 1915.95 to subpart F to read
as follows:
■
§ 1915.95 Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention.
The requirements applicable to
shipyard employment under this section
are identical to the requirements set
forth at 29 CFR 1910.148.
PART 1917—MARINE TERMINALS
7. The authority citation for part 1917
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 941; 29 U.S.C. 653,
655, 657; Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–
71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83
(48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62
FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67
FR 65008), 5–2007 (72 FR 31160), 4–2010 (75
FR 55355), 1–2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8–2020
(85 FR 58393), as applicable; and 29 CFR part
1911.
Sections 1917.28 and 1917.31 also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 553.
Section 1917.29 also issued under 49
U.S.C. 1801–1819 and 5 U.S.C. 553.
Subpart B—Marine Terminal
Operations
8. Add § 1917.32 to subpart B to read
as follows:
■
§ 1917.32 Heat injury and illness
prevention.
The requirements applicable to
marine terminals under this section are
identical to the requirements set forth at
29 CFR 1910.148.
PART 1918—SAFETY AND HEALTH
REGULATIONS FOR LONGSHORING
9. The authority citation for part 1918
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 941; 29 U.S.C. 653,
655, 657; Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–
71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83
(48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62
FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–2002 (67
FR 65008), 5–2007 (72 FR 31160), 4–2010 (75
FR 55355), 1–2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8–2020
(85 FR 58393), as applicable; and 29 CFR
1911.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Sections 1918.90 and 1918.110 also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 553.
Section 1918.100 also issued under 49
U.S.C. 5101 et seq. and 5 U.S.C. 553.
■
10. Add subpart L to read as follows:
Subpart L—Occupational Health and
Environmental Controls
Sec.
1918.111 through 1918.147 [Reserved]
1918.148 Heat injury and illness
prevention.
29 CFR part 1911, unless otherwise noted
Sections 1926.58, 1926.59, 1926.60, and
1926.65 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 and
29 CFR part 1911.
Section 1926.61 also issued under 49
U.S.C. 1801–1819 and 5 U.S.C. 553.
Section 1926.62 also issued under sec.
1031, Public Law 102–550, 106 Stat. 3672 (42
U.S.C. 4853).
Section 1926.65 also issued under sec. 126,
Public Law 99–499, 100 Stat. 1614 (reprinted
at 29 U.S.C.A. 655 Note) and 5 U.S.C. 553.
Subpart D—Occupational Health and
Environmental Controls
§ 1918.148 Heat injury and illness
prevention.
The requirements applicable to
longshoring operations and related
employments under this section are
identical to the requirements set forth at
29 CFR 1910.148.
PART 1926—SAFETY AND HEALTH
REGULATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION
11. The authority citation for part
1926 continues to read as follows:
12. Add § 1926.67 to subpart D to read
as follows:
■
§ 1926.67 Heat injury and illness
prevention.
The requirements applicable to
construction work under this section are
identical to the requirements set forth at
29 CFR 1910.148.
■
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 3704; 29 U.S.C. 653,
655, and 657; and Secretary of Labor’s Order
No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059),
9–83 (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–
96 (62 FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), 5–
2002 (67 FR 65008), 5–2007 (72 FR 31159),
4–2010 (75 FR 55355), 1–2012 (77 FR 3912),
or 8–2020 (85 FR 58393), as applicable; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:42 Aug 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
PART 1928—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY
AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR
AGRICULTURE
11. The authority citation for part
1928 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s
PO 00000
Frm 00377
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
71073
Order No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR
25059), 9–83 (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR
9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), 3–2000 (65 FR
50017), 5–2002 (67 FR 65008), 4–2010 (75 FR
55355), or 8–2020 (85 FR 58393), as
applicable; and 29 CFR 1911.
Section 1928.21 also issued under 49
U.S.C. 1801–1819 and 5 U.S.C. 553.
12. Amend § 1928.21 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(8)(i), removing the
word ‘‘and’’ at the end of the paragraph;
■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(8)(ii); and
■ c. Adding paragraph (a)(9).
The revision and addition read as
follows:
■
■
§ 1928.21 Applicable standards in 29 CFR
part 1910.
(a) * * *
(8) * * *
(ii) Agricultural establishments that
maintain a temporary labor camp,
regardless of how many employees are
engaged on any given day in hand-labor
operations in the field; and
(9) Heat injury and illness
prevention—§ 1910.148 of this chapter
with respect to requirements applicable
to agricultural operations.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2024–14824 Filed 8–29–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
E:\FR\FM\30AUP2.SGM
30AUP2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 169 (Friday, August 30, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70698-71073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14824]
[[Page 70697]]
Vol. 89
Friday,
No. 169
August 30, 2024
Part II
Department of Labor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
29 CFR Part 1910, 1915, 1917, et al.
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 70698]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Part 1910, 1915, 1917, 1918, 1926, and 1928
[Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009]
RIN 1218-AD39
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work
Settings
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OSHA is proposing to issue a new standard, titled Heat Injury
and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings. The
standard would apply to all employers conducting outdoor and indoor
work in all general industry, construction, maritime, and agriculture
sectors where OSHA has jurisdiction, with some exceptions. It would be
a programmatic standard that would require employers to create a plan
to evaluate and control heat hazards in their workplace. It would more
clearly set forth employer obligations and the measures necessary to
effectively protect employees from hazardous heat. OSHA requests
comments on all aspects of the proposed rule.
DATES: Comments to this NPRM (including requests for a hearing) and
other information must be submitted by December 30, 2024.
Informal public hearing: OSHA will schedule an informal public
hearing on the proposed rule if requested during the comment period. If
a hearing is requested, the location and date of the hearing,
procedures for interested parties to notify the agency of their
intention to participate, and procedures for participants to submit
their testimony and documentary evidence will be announced in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit comments and attachments,
identified by Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009, electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow
the instructions online for making electronic submissions. After
accessing ``all documents and comments'' in the docket (Docket No.
OSHA-2021-0009), check the ``proposed rule'' box in the column headed
``Document Type,'' find the document posted on the date of publication
of this document, and click the ``Comment Now'' link. When uploading
multiple attachments to regulations.gov, please number all of your
attachments because regulations.gov will not automatically number the
attachments. This will be very useful in identifying all attachments.
For example, Attachment 1--title of your document, Attachment 2--title
of your document, Attachment 3--title of your document. For assistance
with commenting and uploading documents, please see the Frequently
Asked Questions on regulations.gov.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency's name and
the docket number for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009). 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 commenters about
submitting information they do not want made available to the public,
or submitting materials that contain personal information (either about
themselves or others), such as Social Security Numbers and birthdates.
Docket citations: This Federal Register document references
material in Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009, which is the docket for this
rulemaking.
Citations to documents: The docket referenced most frequently in
this document is the docket for this rulemaking, docket number OSHA-
2021-0009, cited as Document ID OSHA-2021-0009. Documents in the docket
get an individual document identification number, for example ``OSHA-
2021-0009-0047.'' Because this is the most frequently cited docket, the
citation is shortened to indicate only the document number. The example
is cited in the NPRM as ``Document ID 0047.''
Documents cited in this NPRM are available in the rulemaking docket
(Docket ID OSHA-2021-0009). They are available to read and download by
searching the docket number or document ID number at https://www.regulations.gov. Each docket index lists all documents in that
docket, including public comments, supporting materials, meeting
transcripts, and other documents. However, some documents (e.g.,
copyrighted material) in the dockets are not available to read or
download from that website. All documents in the dockets are available
for inspection at the OSHA Docket Office. This information can be used
to search for a supporting document in the docket at
www.regulations.gov. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-2350
(TTY number: 877-889-5627) for assistance in locating docket
submissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For press inquiries: Contact Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, Occupational Safety and Health Administration;
telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: [email protected].
General information and technical inquiries: Contact Stephen
Schayer, Director, Office of Physical Hazards and Others, OSHA
Directorate of Standards and Guidance; telephone: (202) 693-1950;
email: [email protected].
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 at OSHA's web page at https://www.osha.gov.
The docket is available at https://www.regulations.gov, the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. A ``100-word summary'' is also available on https://www.regulations.gov. For additional information on submitting items
to, or accessing items in, the docket, please refer to the ADDRESSES
section of this NPRM. Most exhibits are available at https://www.regulations.gov; some exhibits (e.g., copyrighted material) are not
available to download from that web page. However, all materials in the
dockets are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket
Office.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Pertinent Legal Authority
A. Introduction
B. Significant Risk
C. Feasibility
D. High Degree of Employee Protection
III. Background
A. Introduction
B. Need for Proposal
C. Events Leading to Proposal
D. Other Standards
IV. Health Effects
A. Introduction
B. General Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health Effects
C. Identifying Cases of Heat-Related Health Effects
D. Heat-Related Deaths
E. Heat Stroke
F. Heat Exhaustion
G. Heat Syncope
H. Rhabdomyolysis
I. Hyponatremia
J. Heat Cramps
K. Heat Rash
L. Heat Edema
M. Kidney Health Effects
N. Other Health Effects
O. Factors That Affect Risk for Heat-Related Health Effects
P. Heat-Related Injuries
[[Page 70699]]
V. Risk Assessment
A. Risk Assessment
B. Basis for Initial and High Heat Triggers
C. Risk Reduction
VI. Significance of Risk
A. Material Harm
B. Significant Risk
C. Preliminary Conclusions
VII. Explanation of Proposed Requirements
A. Paragraph (a) Scope and Application
B. Paragraph (b) Definitions
C. Paragraph (c) Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Plan
D. Paragraph (d) Identifying Heat Hazards
E. Paragraph (e) Requirements at or Above the Initial Heat
Trigger
F. Paragraph (f) Requirements at or Above the High Heat Trigger
G. Paragraph (g) Heat Illness and Emergency Response and
Planning
H. Paragraph (h) Training
I. Paragraph (i) Recordkeeping
J. Paragraph (j) Requirements Implemented at no Cost to
Employees
K. Paragraph (k) Dates
L. Paragraph (l) Severability
VIII. Preliminary Economic Analysis and Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis
A. Market Failure and Need for Regulation
B. Profile of Affected Industries
C. Costs of Compliance
D. Economic Feasibility
E. Benefits
F. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
G. Distributional Analysis
H. Appendix A. Description of the Cost Savings Approach
I. Appendix B. Review of Literature on Effects of Heat Exposure
on Non-Health Outcomes
J. Appendix C. Heat Exposure Methodology Used in Distributional
Analysis
K. Appendix D. Definitions of Core Industry Categories Used in
Cost Analysis
IX. Technological Feasibility
X. Additional Requirements
A. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
B. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments/
Executive Order 13175
C. Consultation With the Advisory Committee on Construction
Safety and Health
D. Environmental Impacts
E. Consensus Standards
F. Incorporation by Reference
G. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks
H. Federalism
I. Requirements for States With OSHA-Approved State Plans
J. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
XI. Authority and Signature
I. Executive Summary
Heat is the leading cause of death among all weather-related
phenomena in the United States. Excessive heat in the workplace can
cause a number of adverse health effects, including heat stroke and
even death, if not treated properly. Yet, there is currently no Federal
OSHA standard that regulates heat stress hazards in the workplace.
Although several governmental and non-governmental organizations have
published regulations and guidance to help protect workers from heat
hazards, OSHA believes that a mandatory Federal standard specific to
heat-related injury and illness prevention is necessary to address the
hazards posed by occupational heat exposure. OSHA has preliminarily
determined that this proposed rule would substantially reduce the risk
posed by occupational exposure to hazardous heat by clearly setting
forth employer obligations and the measures necessary to effectively
protect exposed workers.
OSHA is proposing this standard pursuant to the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq. (OSH Act or Act). The Act
authorizes the agency to issue safety or health standards that are
``reasonably necessary or appropriate'' to provide safe or healthful
employment and places of employment (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). A standard is
reasonably necessary or appropriate when a significant risk of material
harm exists in the workplace and the standard would substantially
reduce or eliminate that workplace risk. Applicable legal requirements
are more fully discussed in Section II., Pertinent Legal Authority.
Workers in both outdoor and indoor work settings without adequate
climate controls are at risk of hazardous heat exposure. Certain heat-
generating processes, machinery, and equipment (e.g., hot tar ovens,
furnaces) can also cause heat hazards when cooling measures are not in
place. Based on the best available evidence, as discussed in this
preamble, OSHA has preliminarily determined that exposure to hazardous
heat in the workplace poses a significant risk of serious injury and
illness. This finding of a significant risk of material harm is based
on the health consequences associated with exposure to heat (see
Section IV., Health Effects) as well as the risk assessment (see
Section V., Risk Assessment and Section VI., Significance of Risk). In
Section V.C., Risk Reduction, OSHA demonstrates the efficacy of the
controls relied on in this proposed rule to reduce the risk of heat-
related injury and illness in the workplace. Employees working in
workplaces without these controls are at higher risk of severe health
outcomes from exposure to hazardous heat.
On October 27, 2021, OSHA published in the Federal Register an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) for Heat Injury and
Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings (86 FR 59309).
The ANPRM outlined key issues and challenges in occupational heat-
related injury and illness prevention and aimed to collect evidence,
data, and information critical to informing how OSHA proceeds in the
rulemaking process. The ANPRM included background information on
injuries, illnesses, and fatalities due to heat, underreporting, scope,
geographic region, and inequality in exposures and outcomes. The ANPRM
also covered existing heat injury and illness prevention efforts
including OSHA's efforts, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) criteria documents, State standards, and
other standards.
OSHA received 965 unique public comments, which largely supported
the need for continued rulemaking. The agency then worked with the
National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH)
to assemble a Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group. The Work
Group was tasked with evaluating stakeholder input to the ANPRM and
developing recommendations on potential elements of a proposed heat
injury and illness prevention standard. The Work Group presented its
recommendations on potential elements of a proposed heat injury and
illness prevention standard for consideration by the full NACOSH
committee. On May 31, 2023, NACOSH amended the report to ask OSHA to
include a model written plan and then unanimously voted to submit the
Work Group's recommendations to the Secretary of Labor.
In accordance with the requirements of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), OSHA next convened a
Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel in August 2023. The Panel,
comprised of members from the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
Office of Advocacy, OSHA, and OMB's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, heard comments directly from Small Entity
Representatives (SERs) on the potential impacts of a heat-specific
standard. The Panel received advice and recommendations from the SERs
and reported its findings and recommendations to OSHA. OSHA has taken
the SER's comments and the Panel's findings and recommendations into
consideration in the development of this proposed rule (see Section
VIII.F., Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis).
In accordance with 29 CFR parts 1911 and 1912, OSHA also consulted
with and considered feedback from the Advisory Committee on
Construction
[[Page 70700]]
Safety and Health (ACCSH). On April 24, 2024, the Committee unanimously
passed a motion recommending that OSHA proceed expeditiously with
proposing a standard on heat injury and illness prevention. In
addition, in accordance with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6,
2000), OSHA held a listening session on May 15, 2024, with Tribal
representatives regarding this Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in
Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings rulemaking and provided an opportunity
for the representatives to offer feedback.
The proposed rule is a programmatic standard that requires
employers to create a heat injury and illness prevention plan to
evaluate and control heat hazards in their workplace. It establishes
requirements for identifying heat hazards, implementing engineering and
work practice control measures at or above two heat trigger levels
(i.e., an initial heat trigger and a high heat trigger), developing and
implementing a heat illness and emergency response plan, providing
training to employees and supervisors, and retaining records. The
proposed rule would apply to all employers conducting outdoor and
indoor work in all general industry, construction, maritime, and
agriculture sectors, with some exceptions (see Section VII.A.,
Paragraph (a) Scope and Application). Throughout this document, OSHA
seeks input on alternatives and potential exclusions.
Organizations affected by heat hazards vary significantly in size
and workplace activities. Accordingly, many of the provisions of the
proposed standard provide flexibility for affected employers to choose
the control measures most suited to their workplace. The flexible
nature of the proposed rule may be particularly beneficial to small
organizations with limited resources.
Additionally, to determine whether the proposed rule is feasible
for affected employers, and in accordance with Executive Orders 12866
and 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C 1501 et seq.), OSHA has prepared a
Preliminary Economic Analysis (PEA), including an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (see Section VIII., Preliminary Economic Analysis
and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis). Supporting materials
prepared by OSHA are available in the public docket for this
rulemaking, Document ID OSHA-2021-0009, through regulations.gov.
II. Pertinent Legal Authority
A. Introduction
In the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.,
Congress authorized the Secretary of Labor (``the Secretary'') ``to set
mandatory occupational safety and health standards applicable to
businesses affecting interstate commerce'' (29 U.S.C. 651(b)(3); see
Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Dep't of Labor, 595 U.S. 109, 117 (2022)
(per curiam); see also 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2) (requiring employers to
comply with OSHA standards)). Section 6(b) of the Act authorizes the
promulgation, modification or revocation of occupational safety or
health standards pursuant to detailed notice and comment procedures (29
U.S.C. 655(b)).
Section 3(8) of the Act defines a safety or health standard as a
standard which requires conditions, or the adoption or use of one or
more practices, means, methods, operations, or processes ``reasonably
necessary or appropriate'' to provide safe or healthful employment and
places of employment (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). A standard is reasonably
necessary or appropriate within the meaning of section 3(8) when a
significant risk of material harm exists in the workplace and the
standard would substantially reduce or eliminate that workplace risk
(see Indus. Union Dep't, AFL-CIO v. Am. Petroleum Inst., 448 U.S. 607
(1980) (``Benzene'')). OSHA's authority extends to, for example,
removing workers from environments where workplace hazards exist (see,
e.g., United Steelworkers of America v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189, 1228-
38 (D.C. Cir. 1981); 29 CFR 1910.1028(i)(8); 29 CFR 1910.1024(l); cf.
Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, 445 U.S. 1, 12 (1980) (upholding
regulation allowing employees to refuse dangerous work in certain
circumstances because ``[t]he Act does not wait for an employee to die
or become injured.'').
In addition to the requirement that each standard address a
significant risk, standards must also be technologically feasible (see
UAW v. OSHA, 37 F.3d 665, 668 (D.C. Cir. 1994)). A standard is
technologically feasible when the protective measures it requires
already exist, when available technology can bring the protective
measures into existence, or when that technology is reasonably likely
to develop (see Am. Iron and Steel Inst. v. OSHA, 939 F.2d 975, 980
(D.C. Cir. 1991)).
Finally, a standard must be economically feasible (see Forging
Indus. Ass'n v. Secretary of Labor, 773 F.2d 1436, 1453 (4th Cir.
1985)). A standard is economically feasible if industry can absorb or
pass on the costs of compliance without threatening its long-term
profitability or competitive structure (see American Textile Mfrs.
Inst., Inc., 452 U.S. 490, 530 n.55 (``Cotton Dust'')). Each of these
requirements is discussed further below.
B. Significant Risk
As noted above, OSHA's workplace safety and health standards must
address a significant risk of material harm that exists in the
workplace (see Benzene, 448 U.S. at 614-15). The agency's risk
assessments are based on the best available evidence, and its final
conclusions are made only after considering all information in the
rulemaking record. Reviewing courts have upheld the Secretary's
significant risk determinations where supported by substantial evidence
and ``a reasoned explanation for [their] policy assumptions and
conclusions'' (Bldg & Constr. Trades Dep't v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258,
1266 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (``Asbestos II'')).
The Supreme Court in Benzene explained that ``[i]t is the agency's
responsibility to determine, in the first instance, what it considers
to be a `significant' risk'' (Benzene, 448 U.S. at 655). The Court
declined to ``express any opinion on the . . . difficult question of
what factual determinations would warrant a conclusion that significant
risks are present which make promulgation of a new standard reasonably
necessary or appropriate'' (Benzene, 448 U.S. at 659). The Court
stated, however, that the substantial evidence standard applicable to
OSHA's significant risk determination (see 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(f)) does
not require the agency ``to support its finding that a significant risk
exists with anything approaching scientific certainty'' (Benzene, 448
U.S. at 656). Rather, OSHA may rely on ``a body of reputable scientific
thought'' to which ``conservative assumptions in interpreting the
data'' may be applied, ``risking error on the side of overprotection''
(Benzene, 448 U.S. at 656). The D.C. Circuit has further explained that
OSHA may thus act with a pronounced bias towards worker safety in
making its risk determinations (Asbestos II, 838 F.2d at 1266). The
Supreme Court also recognized that the determination of what
constitutes ``significant risk'' is ``not a mathematical straitjacket''
and will be ``based largely on policy considerations'' (Benzene, 448
U.S. at 655 & n.62).
Once OSHA makes its significant risk finding, the standard it
promulgates must be ``reasonably necessary or appropriate'' to reduce
or eliminate that
[[Page 70701]]
risk (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). In choosing among regulatory alternatives,
however, ``[t]he determination that [one standard] is appropriate, as
opposed to a marginally [more or less protective] standard, is a
technical decision entrusted to the expertise of the agency'' (Nat'l
Mining Ass'n v. Mine Safety and Health Admin., 116 F.3d 520, 528 (D.C.
Cir. 1997) (analyzing a Mine Safety and Health Administration standard
under the Benzene significant risk standard)).
C. Feasibility
The statutory mandate to consider the feasibility of the standard
encompasses both technological and economic feasibility; OSHA has
performed these analyses primarily on an industry-by-industry basis
(United Steelworkers of Am., AFL-CIO-CLC v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189,
1264, 1301 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (``Lead I'')). The agency has also used
application groups, defined by common tasks, as the structure for its
feasibility analyses (Pub. Citizen Health Research Grp. v. OSHA, 557
F.3d 165, 177-79 (3d Cir. 2009)). The Supreme Court has broadly defined
feasible as ``capable of being done'' (Cotton Dust, 452 U.S. at 509-
10).
I. Technological Feasibility
A standard is technologically feasible if the protective measures
it requires already exist, can be brought into existence with available
technology, or can be created with technology that can reasonably be
expected to be developed (Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272; Amer. Iron & Steel
Inst. v. OSHA, 939 F.2d 975, 980 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (``Lead II'')).
Courts have also interpreted technological feasibility to mean that a
typical firm in each affected industry or application group will
reasonably be able to implement the requirements of the standard in
most operations most of the time (see Public Citizen v. OSHA, 557 F.3d
165, 170-71 (3d Cir. 2009); Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272; Lead II, 939 F.2d
at 990)). OSHA's standards may be ``technology forcing,'' so long as
the agency gives an industry a reasonable amount of time to develop new
technologies to comply with the standard. Thus, OSHA is not bound by
the ``technological status quo'' (Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1264).
II. Economic Feasibility
In addition to technological feasibility, OSHA is required to
demonstrate that its standards are economically feasible. A reviewing
court will examine the cost of compliance with an OSHA standard ``in
relation to the financial health and profitability of the industry and
the likely effect of such costs on unit consumer prices'' (Lead I, 647
F.2d at 1265 (citation omitted)). As articulated by the D.C. Circuit in
Lead I, ``OSHA must construct a reasonable estimate of compliance costs
and demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that these costs will not
threaten the existence or competitive structure of an industry, even if
it does portend disaster for some marginal firms'' (Lead I, 647 F.2d at
1272). A reasonable estimate entails assessing ``the likely range of
costs and the likely effects of those costs on the industry'' (Lead I,
647 F.2d at 1266). As with OSHA's consideration of scientific data and
control technology, however, the estimates need not be precise (Cotton
Dust, 452 U.S. at 528-29 & n.54), as long as they are adequately
explained.
OSHA standards satisfy the economic feasibility criterion even if
they impose significant costs on regulated industries so long as they
do not cause massive economic dislocations within a particular industry
or imperil the very existence of the industry (Lead II, 939 F.2d at
980; see also Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272; Asbestos I, 499 F.2d. at 478).
As with its other legal findings, OSHA ``is not required to prove
economic feasibility with certainty, but is required to use the best
available evidence and to support its conclusions with substantial
evidence'' (Lead II, 939 F.2d at 980-81 (citing Lead I, 647 F.2d at
1267)).
In addition to determining economic feasibility, OSHA estimates the
costs and benefits of its proposed and final rules to ensure compliance
with other requirements such as those in Executive Orders 12866 and
13563.
D. High Degree of Employee Protection
Safety standards must provide a high degree of employee protection
to be consistent with the purpose of the Act (see Control of Hazardous
Energy Sources (Lockout/Tagout) Final Rule, Supplemental Statement of
Reasons, 58 FR 16612, 16614-15 (March 30, 1993)). OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this proposed standard is a safety
standard because the health effects associated with exposure to
occupational heat are generally acute. As explained in Section IV.,
Health Effects, the proposed standard aims to address the numerous
acute health effects of occupational exposure to hazardous heat. These
include, among other things, heat stroke, heat exhaustion, heat
syncope, and physical injuries (e.g., falls) due to fatigue or other
heat-related impairments. These harms occur after relatively short-term
exposures to hazardous heat and are typically apparent at the time of
the exposure or shortly thereafter. Consequently, the link between
these harms and heat exposures is also often apparent and they do not
implicate the concerns about latent, hidden harms that underly health
standards (see Benzene, 448 U.S. at 649 n. 54; UAW v. OSHA, 938 F.2d
1310, 1313 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (``Lockout/Tagout I''); National Grain &
Feed Ass'n v. OSHA, 866 F.2d 717, 733 (5th Cir. 1989) (``Grain
Dust'')).
Finally, although OSHA acknowledges that there is growing evidence
occupational exposure to hazardous heat may lead to some chronic
adverse health outcomes like chronic kidney disease, much of the
science in this area is still developing (see Section IV., Health
Effects). In any event, the agency expects that addressing the acute
hazards posed by heat would also protect workers from potential chronic
health outcomes by reducing workers' overall heat strain.
III. Background
A. Introduction
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is
proposing a new standard to protect outdoor and indoor workers from
hazardous heat in the workplace. OSHA promulgates and enforces
occupational safety and health standards under authority granted by the
Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.).
In the absence of a Federal occupational heat standard, five States
have issued heat injury and illness prevention regulations to protect
employees exposed to heat hazards in the workplace: Minnesota (Minn. R.
5205.0110 (1997)); California (Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395
(2005)); Oregon (Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156 (2022); Or. Admin. R. 437-
004-1131 (2022)); Colorado (7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103-15 (2022));
and Washington (Wash. Admin. Code sections 296-62-095 through 296-62-
09560; 296-307-097 through 296-307-09760 (2023)). Although Minnesota
was the first State to adopt a standard covering employees exposed to
indoor environmental heat conditions, California was the first State to
adopt a standard covering employees exposed to outdoor environmental
heat conditions. Washington, Oregon, and Colorado have since enacted
similar regulations to California's, requiring employers to implement
controls and monitor for signs and symptoms of heat-related injury or
illness, among other requirements. In 2023, California proposed a new
standard that would cover indoor work environments (California, 2023).
In 2024, Maryland
[[Page 70702]]
published a proposed standard that would cover both outdoor and indoor
work environments (Maryland, 2024).
Workers in many industries are at risk for heat-related injury and
illness stemming from hazardous heat exposure (see Section V.A., Risk
Assessment). While the general population may be able to avoid and
limit prolonged heat exposure, workers across a wide range of indoor
and outdoor settings often are required to work through shifts with
prolonged heat exposure. Some workplaces have heat generation from
industrial processes and expose workers to sources of radiant heat,
such as ovens and furnaces. Additionally, employers may not take
adequate steps to protect their employees from exposure to hazardous
heat (e.g., not providing rest breaks in cool areas). Many work
operations also require the use of personal protective equipment (PPE)
that can reduce the worker's heat tolerance because it can decrease the
body's ability to cool down. Workers may also face pressure, or
incentivization through pay structures, to push through and continue
working despite high heat exposure, which can increase the risk of
heat-related injury and illness (Billikopf and Norton, 1992; Johansson
et al., 2010; Spector et al., 2015; Pan et al., 2021).
OSHA uses several terms related to excessive heat exposure
throughout this proposal. Heat stress is the combined load of heat that
a person experiences from sources of heat (i.e., metabolic heat and the
environment) and heat retention (e.g., from clothing or personal
protective equipment). Heat strain refers to the body's response to
heat stress (American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH), 2023). Heat-related illness means adverse clinical health
outcomes that occur due to heat exposure, such as heat exhaustion or
heat stroke. Heat-related injury means an injury linked to heat
exposure, such as a fall or cut. OSHA sometimes refers to these
collectively as ``heat-related injuries and illnesses.''
B. Need for Proposal
Occupational heat exposure affects millions of workers in the
United States. Each year, thousands of workers experience heat-related
injuries and illnesses, and some of these cases result in fatalities
(BLS, 2023b; BLS, 2024c). OSHA has relied on the General Duty Clause of
the OSH Act (discussed further below), as well as enforcement emphasis
programs and hazard alerts and other guidance, to protect workers and
inform employers of their legal obligations. However, a standard
specific to heat-related injury and illness prevention would more
clearly set forth enforceable employer obligations and the measures
necessary to effectively protect employees from hazardous heat.
Workers in both outdoor and indoor work settings without adequate
climate controls are at risk of hazardous heat exposure. In addition to
weather-related heat, certain heat-generating processes, machinery, and
equipment (e.g., hot tar ovens, furnaces) can cause hazardous heat
exposure when cooling measures are not in place. An evaluation of 66
heat-related illness enforcement investigations from 2011-2016 found
heat-related injuries and illnesses, including fatalities, occurring in
both outdoor (n=34) and indoor (n=29) work environments (Tustin et al.,
2018a). Excessive heat exacerbates existing health conditions like
asthma, diabetes, kidney failure, and heart disease, and can cause heat
stroke and death if not treated properly and promptly. Some groups may
be more likely to experience adverse health effects from heat, such as
pregnant workers (NIOSH, 2024), while others are disproportionately
exposed to hazardous levels of heat, such as workers of color in
essential jobs, who are more often employed in work settings with a
high risk of hazardous heat exposure (Gubernot et al., 2015).
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), in its Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries, documented 1,042 U.S. worker deaths due to
occupational exposure to environmental heat from 1992-2022, with an
average of 34 fatalities per year during that period (BLS, 2024c). In
2022 alone, BLS reported 43 work-related deaths due to environmental
heat exposure (BLS, 2024c). The BLS Annual Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) estimates 33,890 work-related heat
injuries and illnesses involving days away from work from 2011-2020,
which is an average of 3,389 injuries and illnesses occurring each year
during this period (BLS, 2023b).
Workers across hundreds of industries are at risk for hazardous
heat exposure and resulting heat-related injuries and illnesses. From
January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2022, 1,054 heat-related injuries,
illnesses, and fatalities were reported to and investigated by OSHA,
including 625 heat-related hospitalizations and 211 heat-related
fatalities, as well as 218 heat-related injuries and illnesses that did
not result in hospitalization. During this time, hospitalizations
occurred most frequently in construction, manufacturing, and postal and
delivery service. Fatalities were most frequently reported in
construction, landscaping, agriculture, manufacturing, and postal and
delivery service (as identified by 2-digit NAICS codes).
However, as explained in Section V.A., Risk Assessment, these
statistics likely do not capture the true magnitude and prevalence of
heat-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities. Recent studies
demonstrate significant undercounting of occupational injuries and
illnesses by both the BLS SOII and OSHA's enforcement data. One reason
for this undercounting is that the BLS SOII only reports the number of
heat-related injuries and illnesses involving days away from work and
thus does not capture the full picture of heat-related injuries and
illnesses. An examination of workers' compensation claims in
California, which include more than only cases involving days away from
work, identified 3 to 6 times the number of annual heat-related illness
and injury cases than reported by BLS SOII (Heinzerling et al., 2020).
In addition, evidence has shown significant underreporting as employers
and employees are disincentivized from reporting injuries and illnesses
due to several factors, including potential increases in workers'
compensation costs or impacts on the employer's reputation, or an
employee's fear of retaliation or lack of awareness of their right to
speak out about workplace conditions (BLS, 2020b).
Heat-related injuries and illnesses may present unique challenges
to surveillance efforts. As the nature of heat-related symptoms (e.g.,
headache, fatigue) vary, some cases may be attributed to other
illnesses rather than heat (as discussed in Section IV., Health
Effects). Furthermore, heat is not always identified as a contributing
factor to fatality, as heat exposure may exacerbate existing medical
conditions and medical professionals may not witness the symptoms and
events preceding death (Luber et al., 2006).
Finally, exposure to heat can interfere with routine occupational
tasks and impact workers' psychomotor and mental performance, which can
lead to workplace injuries. Particularly, heat can impair performance
of job tasks related to complex cognitive function (Hancock and
Vasmatzidis, 2003; Piil et al., 2017) and reduce decision making
abilities (Ramsey et al., 1983; Xiang et al., 2014a) and productivity
(Foster et al., 2021). A growing body of evidence has demonstrated that
heat-induced impairments may result in significant occupational
injuries that are not currently factored into official statistics for
heat-related cases (Spector et al., 2016; Calkins et al., 2019;
Dillender, 2021; Park et al., 2021). See Section V.A., Risk Assessment,
for further
[[Page 70703]]
discussion on underreporting of heat-related injuries, illnesses, and
fatalities.
While a significant percentage of heat-related incidents are
unreported, OSHA's investigations of reported heat-related fatalities
point to many gaps in employee protections. OSHA has identified the
following circumstances in its review of 211 heat-related fatality
investigations from 2017-2022: employees left alone by employers after
symptoms started; employers not providing adequate medical attention to
employees with symptoms; employers preventing employees from taking
rest breaks; employers not providing water on-site; employers not
providing on-site access to shade; employers not providing cooling
measures on-site; and employers not having programs to acclimatize
employees to hot work environments (https://www.osha.gov/fatalities).
OSHA has relied on multiple mechanisms to protect employees from
hazardous heat, however, OSHA's efforts to prevent the aforementioned
circumstances have been met with challenges without a heat-specific
standard (as discussed in Section III.C.III., OSHA's Heat-Related
Enforcement).
Many U.S. States run their own OSHA-approved State Plans (e.g.,
State heat standards, voluntary consensus standards) (see Section
III.D., Other Standards), however OSHA has preliminarily determined
that this standard is still needed to protect workers from the
persistent and serious hazards posed by occupational heat exposure. As
explained in Section VI., Significance of Risk, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that a significant risk of material harm from occupational
exposure to hazardous heat exists, and issuance of this standard would
substantially reduce that risk. Therefore, to more clearly set forth
employer obligations and the measures necessary to more effectively
protect employees from hazardous heat, and reduce the number and
frequency of occupational injuries, illness, and fatalities caused by
exposure to hazardous heat, OSHA is proposing a Federal standard for
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention for Outdoor and Indoor Work
Settings.
C. Events Leading to the Proposal
I. History of Heat as a Recognized Occupational Hazard
Heat exposure has long been recognized as an occupational hazard.
For example, in the United States, the occupational hazards associated
with the construction of the Hoover Dam between 1931 and 1935 brought
attention to the effects of heat on worker health. The Bureau of
Reclamation reported that 14 dam workers and two others residing in the
work area died from ``heat prostration'' in 1931 (Bureau of
Reclamation, 2015). According to a local newspaper, temperatures at the
dam site that summer reached 140 [deg]F in the sun and 120 [deg]F in
the shade (Turk, 2018; Rogers, 2012). In response to the extreme heat
of the summer and other unsafe working conditions, the Industrial
Workers of the World convinced Hoover Dam workers to strike over safety
concerns (Turk, 2018; Rogers, 2012). Six Companies, the conglomerate of
companies hired by the Bureau of Reclamation to construct most of the
dam, was forced to make concessions, including protections against HRI
such as providing potable water in dormitories, bringing ice water to
workers at their work sites, and adding first aid stations closer to
the job site (Rogers, 2012). The heat-related deaths that occurred
during 1931 also prompted Harvard University researchers from the
Harvard Fatigue Laboratory to travel to the Hoover Dam and study the
relationship between hot, dry temperatures, physical performance, and
heart rate (Turk, 2018).
Heat-related illnesses were identified as a major concern for the
U.S. military in the 1940s and 1950s. Between 1942 and 1944, 198
soldiers died of heat stroke at U.S.-based training camps, 157 of which
did not have a known history of cardiac diseases or other conditions
that may predispose them to heat illness (Schickele, 1947, p. 236).
This led to investigations of the environmental conditions at the time
of these deaths, and eventually to the development of wet bulb globe
temperature (WBGT) to measure heat stress (Yaglou and Minard, 1957;
Minard, 1961; Department of the Army, 2022; Department of the Navy,
2023).
Research on the effects of occupational heat exposure continued in
the 1960s, as researchers conducted trials examining the physiological
effects of work at various temperatures (e.g., Lind, 1963). Findings
from these trials would eventually underpin the American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV),
as well as the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) (Dukes-Dobos and Henschel,
1973). ACGIH first proposed guidelines for a TLV in 1971, which were
later adopted in 1974.
Heat was recognized as a preventable workplace hazard in the
legislative history of the OSH Act. Senator Edmund Muskie submitted a
letter in support of the OSH Act into the Congressional record on
behalf of ``a distinguished group of citizens, including a former
Secretary of Labor and several noted scientists.'' (Senate Debate on S.
2193, Nov. 16, 1970), reprinted in Legislative History of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, pp. 513-14 (1971)
(Committee Print) (``Leg. Hist.''). The letter states, ``Most
industrial diseases and accidents are preventable. Modern technological
and medical sciences are capable of solving the problems of noise,
dust, heat, fumes, and toxic substances in the plants. However,
existing legislation in this area does not begin to meet the problems''
(Leg. Hist., pp. 513-14).
In 1972, just two years after promulgation of the OSH Act, NIOSH
first recommended a potential OSHA heat standard in its Criteria for a
Recommended Standard (NIOSH, 1972). This criteria document, issued
under the authority of section 20(a) of the OSH Act, recommended an
OSHA standard based on a critical review of scientific and technical
information. In response, an OSHA Standards Advisory Committee on Heat
Stress was appointed in 1973 and presented recommendations for a
standard for work in hot environments in 1974. At the time, 12 of 15
members of the advisory committee agreed that occupational heat stress
warranted a standard (Ramsey, 1975).
NIOSH's criteria document for a recommended standard has since been
updated in 1986 (NIOSH, 1986) and again in 2016 (NIOSH, 2016). The 2016
criteria document recommends various provisions to protect workers from
heat stress, including rest breaks, hydration, shade, acclimatization
plans, and worker training (NIOSH, 2016). The 2016 criteria document
also recommends that no worker be ``exposed to combinations of
metabolic and environmental heat greater than'' the recommended alert
limit (RAL) for unacclimatized workers or the recommended exposure
limit (REL) for acclimatized workers). The document recommends that
environmental heat be assessed with measurements of WBGT (NIOSH, 2016).
A detailed report of the history of heat as a recognized
occupational hazard is available in the docket (ERG, 2024a). The report
summarizes historical documentation of occupational heat-related
illness beginning in ancient times and from the eighteenth century
through the regulatory interest in the twentieth century.
[[Page 70704]]
II. OSHA's Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Efforts
In 2011, OSHA issued a memorandum to inform regional administrators
and State Plan designees of inspection guidance for heat-related
illnesses (OSHA, 2011). That same year, OSHA launched the Heat Illness
Prevention Campaign (https://www.osha.gov/heat) to build awareness of
prevention strategies and tools for employers and workers to reduce
occupational heat-related illness. In its original form, the Campaign
delivered a message of ``Water. Rest. Shade.'' The agency updated
Campaign materials in 2021 to recognize both indoor and outdoor heat
hazards, as well as the importance of protecting new and returning
workers from hazardous heat with an acclimatization period.
In addition, OSHA maintains on its website a Heat Topics page on
workplace heat exposure (https://www.osha.gov/heat-exposure/), which
provides additional information and resources. The page provides
information on planning and supervision in hot work environments,
identification of heat-related illness and first aid, information on
prevention such as training, calculating heat stress and controls,
personal risk factors, descriptions of other heat standards and case
study examples of situations where workers developed heat-related
illness. OSHA and NIOSH also co-developed a Heat Safety Tool Smartphone
App for both Android and iPhone devices (see www.osha.gov/heat/heat-app). The app provides outdoor, location-specific temperature,
humidity, and heat index (HI) readings. Measurements for indoor work
sites must be collected and manually entered into the app by the user
for accurate calculations. The app also provides relevant information
on identifying signs and symptoms of heat-related illness and steps to
prevent heat-related injuries and illnesses. Despite the strengths and
reach of the Campaign, Heat Topics page, and Heat Safety Tool App,
these guidance and communication materials are not legally enforceable
requirements.
III. OSHA's Heat-Related Enforcement
Without a specific standard governing hazardous heat conditions at
workplaces, the agency currently enforces section 5(a)(1) (the General
Duty Clause) of the OSH Act against employers that expose their workers
to this recognized hazard. Section 5(a)(1) states that employers have a
general duty to furnish to each of their employees ``employment and a
place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are
causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm'' to
employees (29 U.S.C. 654(a)(1)). To prove a violation of the General
Duty Clause, OSHA must establish--in each individual case--that: (1)
the employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which its
employees were exposed; (2) the hazard was recognized; (3) the hazard
was causing or likely to cause death or serious injury; and (4) a
feasible means to eliminate or materially reduce the hazard existed
(see, e.g., A.H. Sturgill Roofing, Inc., 2019 O.S.H. Dec. (CCH) ]
[thinsp]33712, 2019 WL 1099857 (No. 13-0224, 2019)).
OSHA has relied on the General Duty Clause to cite employers for
heat-related hazards for decades (see, e.g., Duriron Co., 11 BNA OSHC
1405, 1983 WL 23869 (No. 77-2847, 1983), aff'd, 750 F.2d 28 (6th Cir.
1984)). According to available OSHA enforcement data, between 1986 and
2023, Federal OSHA issued at least 348 hazardous heat-related citations
under the General Duty Clause. Of these citations, 85 were issued
between 1986-2000 (OSHA, 2024b). Citations were identified using
multiple queries of OSHA enforcement data and then manually reviewed to
ensure the inclusion of only citations due to heat exposure and no
other exposures (e.g., burns or explosions). Several keywords were
utilized to filter the data for inclusion (e.g., ``heat,'' ``heat
stress,'' ``heat illness,'' ``WBGT'') and exclusion (e.g.,
``explosion,'' ``flash,'' ``electrical burn,'' ``fire''). Due to
limitations of the data set on which OSHA relied, OSHA did not have
access to violation text descriptions of citations issued before the
mid-1980s and thus did not determine how many are related to heat
exposure prior to this time period. Additionally, over half of the
citations from 1986-1989 are missing violation text descriptions, which
likely resulted in an undercount of heat-related citations.
OSHA has used its general inspection authority (29 U.S.C. 657) to
target heat-related injuries and illnesses in various Regional Emphasis
Programs (REPs). OSHA enforcement emphasis programs focus the agency's
resources on particular hazards or high-hazard industries (see Marshall
v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307, 321 (1978) (affirming OSHA's use of an
administrative plan containing specific neutral criteria to focus
inspections)). OSHA's Region VI regional office, located in Dallas, TX,
has a heat-related special REP (OSHA, 2019). This region covers Texas,
New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. OSHA's Region IX
regional office, located in San Francisco, CA, also has a heat-related
REP (OSHA, 2022). This region covers American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Guam, Hawaii, Nevada, and the Northern Mariana Islands.
These REPs allow field staff to conduct heat illness inspections of
outdoor work activities on days when the high temperature is forecasted
to be above 80 [deg]F.
On September 1, 2021, OSHA issued updated Inspection Guidance for
Heat-Related Hazards, which established a new enforcement initiative to
protect employees from heat-related injuries and illnesses while
working in hazardous hot indoor and outdoor environments (OSHA, 2021).
The guidance provided that days when the heat index exceeds 80 [deg]F
would be considered heat priority days. It announced that enforcement
efforts would be increased on heat priority days for a variety of
indoor and outdoor industries, with the aim of identifying and
mitigating potential hazards and preventing heat-illnesses before they
occur.
In April 2022, OSHA launched a National Emphasis Program (NEP) to
protect employees from heat-related hazards and resulting injuries and
illnesses in outdoor and indoor workplaces. The NEP expanded the
agency's ongoing heat-related injury and illness prevention initiatives
and campaign by setting forth a targeted enforcement component and
reiterating its compliance assistance and outreach efforts. The NEP
targets specific industries expected to have the highest exposures to
heat-related hazards and resulting illnesses and deaths. This approach
is intended to encourage early interventions by employers to prevent
illnesses and deaths among workers during high heat conditions (CPL 03-
00-024). As of June 26, 2024, OSHA has conducted 5,038 Heat NEP Federal
inspections. More than 1,229 of these were initiated by complaints and
117 were due to the occurrence of a fatality or catastrophe. As a
result of these inspections, OSHA issued 56 General Duty Clause
citations and 736 Hazard Alert Letters (HALs). Inspections occurred
across various industries (as identified by 2-digit NAICS codes)
including construction, which had the highest number of inspections, as
well as manufacturing, maritime, agriculture, transportation,
warehousing, food services, waste management, and remediation services.
On July 27, 2023, OSHA issued a heat hazard alert to remind
employers of their obligation to protect workers against heat injury
and illness in outdoor and indoor workplaces. The alert highlights what
employers can and
[[Page 70705]]
should be doing to protect employees. It also serves to remind
employees of their rights, including protections against retaliation.
In addition, the alert highlights steps OSHA is currently taking to
protect workers and directs employers, employees, and the public to
OSHA resources, including guidance and fact sheets on heat.
OSHA's efforts to protect employees from hazardous heat conditions
using the General Duty Clause, although important, have limitations
leaving many workers vulnerable to heat-related hazards. For example,
the Commission has struggled to determine exactly what conditions
create a recognized heat hazard under the General Duty Clause, and has
therefore suggested the necessity of a standard (see, A.H. Sturgill
Roofing, Inc., 2019 OSHD (CCH) ] [thinsp]33712, 2019 WL 1099857, at *2-
5 and n.8 (No. 13-0224, 2019) (``The Secretary's failure to establish
the existence of an excessive heat hazard here illustrates the
difficulty in addressing this issue in the absence of an OSHA
standard.''); U.S. Postal Service, 2023 OSHD (CCH) ] 33908, 2023 WL
2263313, at *3 n.7 (Nos. 16-1713, 16-1872, 17-0023,17-0279, 2023)
(noting Commissioner Laihow's opinion that ``A myriad of factors, such
as the geographical area where the work is being performed and the
nature of the tasks involved, can impact'' whether excessive heat is
present, and indicating that a standard is therefore necessary to
define the hazard).
Under the General Duty Clause, OSHA cannot require abatement before
proving in an enforcement proceeding that specific workplace conditions
are hazardous; whereas a standard would establish the existence of the
hazard at the rulemaking stage, thus allowing OSHA to identify and
require specific abatement measures without having to prove the
existence of a hazard in each case (see Sanderson Farms, Inc. v. Perez,
811 F.3d 730, 735 (5th Cir. 2016) (``Since OSHA is required to
determine that there is a hazard before issuing a standard, the
Secretary is not ordinarily required to prove the existence of a hazard
each time a standard is enforced.'')). Given OSHA's burden under the
General Duty Clause, it is currently difficult for OSHA to ensure
necessary abatement before employee lives and health are unnecessarily
endangered. Further, under the General Duty Clause OSHA must largely
rely on expert witness testimony to prove both the existence of a
hazard and the availability of feasible abatement measures that will
materially reduce or eliminate the hazard in each individual case (see,
e.g., Industrial Glass, 15 BNA OSHC 1594, 1992 WL 88787, at *4-7 (No.
88-348, 1992)).
Moreover, as OSHA has noted in similar contexts, standards have the
advantage of providing greater clarity to employers and employees of
the measures required to protect employees and are developed with the
benefit of information gathered in the notice and comment process (see
86 FR 32376, 32418 (Jun. 21, 2021) (COVID-19 Healthcare ETS); 56 FR
64004, 64007 (Dec. 6, 1991) (Bloodborne Pathogens Standard)).
OSHA currently has other existing standards that, while applicable
to some issues related to hazardous heat, have not proven to be
adequate in protecting workers from exposure to hazardous heat. For
example, OSHA's Recordkeeping standard (29 CFR 1904.7) requires
employers to record and report injuries and illnesses that meet
recording criteria. Additionally, the agency's Sanitation standards (29
CFR 1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127, 1926.51, and 1928.110) require
employers to provide potable water readily accessible to workers. While
these standards require that drinking water be made available in
``sufficient amounts,'' they do not specify quantities, and employers
are not required to encourage workers to frequently hydrate on hot
days.
OSHA's Safety Training and Education standard (29 CFR 1926.21)
requires employers in the construction industry to train employees in
the recognition, avoidance, and prevention of unsafe conditions in
their workplaces. OSHA's PPE standards (29 CFR 1910.132, 1915.152,
1917.95, and 1926.28) require employers to conduct a hazard assessment
to determine the appropriate PPE to be used to protect employees from
the hazards identified in the assessment. However, hazardous heat is
not specifically identified as a hazard for which workers need training
or PPE, complicating the application of these requirements to hazardous
heat.
IV. Rulemaking Activities Leading to This Proposal
OSHA has received multiple petitions to promulgate a heat injury
and illness prevention standard, including in 2018 from Public Citizen,
on behalf of approximately 130 organizations (Public Citizen et al.,
2018). OSHA has also been urged by members of Congress to initiate
rulemaking for a Federal heat standard, as well as by the Attorneys
General of several States in 2023.
On October 27, 2021, OSHA published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM) for Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor
and Indoor Work Settings in the Federal Register (86 FR 59309)
(referred to as ``the ANPRM'' hereafter). The ANPRM outlined key issues
and challenges in occupational heat-related injury and illness
prevention and aimed to collect evidence, data, and information
critical to informing how OSHA proceeds in the rulemaking process. The
ANPRM included background information on injuries, illnesses, and
fatalities due to heat, underreporting, scope, geographic region, and
inequality in exposures and outcomes. The ANPRM also covered existing
heat injury and illness prevention efforts, including OSHA's efforts,
the NIOSH criteria documents, State standards, and other standards. The
initial public comment period was extended and closed on January 26,
2022. In response to the ANPRM, OSHA received 965 unique comments. The
comments covered several topics, including the scope of a standard,
heat stress thresholds for workers across various industries, heat
acclimatization planning, and heat exposure monitoring, as well as the
nature, types, and effectiveness of controls that may be required as
part of a standard.
Following the publication of the ANPRM, OSHA presented topics from
the ANPRM and updates on the heat rulemaking to several stakeholders,
including several trade associations, the Office of Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration's (SBA's Office of Advocacy) Labor Safety
Roundtable (November 19, 2021), and NIOSH National Occupational
Research Agenda (NORA) councils, including the Construction Sector
Council (November 17, 2021), Landscaping Safety Workgroup (January 12,
2022), and Oil and Gas Extraction Sector (April 7, 2022).
On May 3, 2022, OSHA held a virtual public stakeholder meeting on
the agency's ``Initiatives to Protect Workers from Heat-Related
Hazards.'' A total of over 1,300 people attended the virtual meeting,
and the recorded video has been viewed over 3,500 times (see
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud29WsnsOw8) as of June 2024. The six-hour
meeting provided stakeholders an opportunity to learn about and comment
on efforts OSHA is taking to protect workers from heat-related hazards
and ways the public can participate in the agency's rulemaking process.
OSHA also established a Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work
Group of the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and
Health (NACOSH) to support the agency's rulemaking and outreach
efforts. The Work Group was tasked with reviewing
[[Page 70706]]
and developing recommendations on OSHA's heat illness prevention
guidance materials, evaluating stakeholder input, and developing
recommendations on potential elements of any proposed heat injury and
illness prevention standard. On May 31, 2023, the Work Group presented
its recommendations on potential elements of a proposed heat injury and
illness prevention standard for consideration by the full NACOSH
committee. The Work Group recommended that any proposed heat injury and
illness prevention standard include: a written exposure control plan/
heat illness prevention plan; training; environmental monitoring;
workplace control measures; acclimatization; worker participation; and
emergency response (Document ID OSHA-2023-0003-0007). After
deliberations, NACOSH amended the report to ask OSHA to include a model
written plan and then submitted its recommendations to the Secretary of
Labor (Document ID OSHA-2023-0003-0012).
As an initial rulemaking step, OSHA convened a Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel (SBAR Panel) on August 25, 2023, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act (SBREFA) of
1996. This SBAR Panel consisted of members from OSHA, SBA's Office of
Advocacy, and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
in the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The SBAR
Panel identifies individual representatives of affected small entities,
termed small entity representatives (SERs), which includes small
businesses, small local government entities, and non-profits. This
process enabled OSHA, with the assistance of SBA's Office of Advocacy
and OIRA, to obtain advice and recommendations from SERs about the
potential impacts of the regulatory options outlined in the regulatory
framework and about additional options or alternatives to the
regulatory framework that may alleviate those impacts while still
meeting the objectives and requirements of the OSH Act.
The SBAR Panel hosted six online meetings on September 9, 12, 13,
14, 18, and 19, 2023, with participation from a total of 82 SERs from a
wide range of industries. A final report containing the findings,
advice, and recommendations of the SBAR Panel was submitted to the
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health on
November 3, 2023, to help inform the agency's decision making with
respect to this rulemaking (Document ID OSHA-2021-0009-1059).
In accordance with 29 CFR parts 1911 and 1912, OSHA presented to
the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) on its
framework for a proposed rule for heat injury and illness prevention in
outdoor and indoor work settings on April 24, 2024. The Committee then
passed unanimously a motion recommending that OSHA proceed
expeditiously with proposing a standard on heat injury and illness
prevention. The Committee also recommended that OSHA consider the
feedback and questions discussed by Committee members during the
meeting in formulating the proposed rule (see the minutes from the
meeting, Docket No. 2024-0002). OSHA has considered the Committee's
feedback in the development of this proposal.
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6,
2000), OSHA held a listening session with Tribal representatives
regarding this Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor
Work Settings rulemaking on May 15, 2024. OSHA provided an overview of
the rulemaking effort and sought comment on what, if any, tribal
implications would result from the rulemaking. A summary of the meeting
and list of attendees can be viewed in the docket (DOL, 2024a).
D. Other Standards
Various other organizations have also either identified the need
for standards to prevent occupational heat-related injury and illness
or published their own standards. In 2024, the American National
Standards Institute/American Society of Safety Professionals A10
Committee (ANSI/ASSP) published a consensus standard on heat stress
management in construction and demolition operations. The International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) also has a standard for
evaluating heat stress: ISO 7243: Ergonomics of the thermal
environments--Assessment of heat stress using the WBGT (wet bulb globe
temperature) index (ISO, 2017). ISO 7243 uses WBGT values, along with
metabolic rate, to assess hot environments, similar to ACGIH and NIOSH
recommendations. Additional ISO standards address predicting sweat rate
and core temperature (ISO 7933), and determining metabolic rate (ISO
8996), physiological strain (ISO 9886), and thermal characteristics for
clothing (ISO 9920). In 2021, the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) finalized its Standard Guide for Managing Heat Stress
and Heat Strain in Foundries (E3279-21) which establishes ``best
practices for recognizing and managing occupational heat stress and
heat strain in foundry environments.'' The standard outlines employer
responsibilities and recommends elements for a ``Heat Stress and Heat
Strain Management Program'' (ASTM, 2021).
ACGIH has identified TLVs for heat stress (ACGIH, 2023). The TLVs
utilize WBGT and take into consideration metabolic rate or workload
categories. Additionally, ACGIH provides clothing adjustment factors
which are added to the measured WBGT for certain types of work clothing
to account for the impaired thermal regulation.
The U.S. Armed Forces has developed extensive heat-related illness
prevention and management strategies. The Warrior Heat and Exertion
Related Events Collaborative is a tri-service group of military leaders
focused on clinical, educational, and research efforts related to
exercise and exertional heat-related illnesses and medical emergencies
(HPRC, 2023). The U.S. Army has a Heat Center at Fort Benning which
focuses on management, research, and prevention of heat-related illness
and death (Galer, 2019). In 2023, the U.S. Army updated its Training
and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Regulation 350-29 addressing heat and
cold casualties. The regulation includes requirements for rest and
water consumption according to specific WBGT levels and work intensity
(Department of the Army, 2023). The U.S. Navy has developed
Physiological Heat Exposure Limit curves that are based on metabolic
and environmental heat loads and represent the maximum allowable heat
exposure limits, which were most recently updated in 2023. The Navy
monitors WBGT and has guidelines based on these measurements, with
physical training diminishing as WBGTs increase and all nonessential
outdoor activity stopped when WBGTs exceed 90 [deg]F (Department of the
Navy, 2023). The U.S. Marine Corps follows the Navy's guidelines for
implementation of the Marine Corps Heat Injury Prevention Program
(Commandant of the Marine Corps, 2002). In 2022, the U.S. Army and U.S.
Air Force issued an update to their technical heat stress bulletin,
which outlines measures to prevent indoor and outdoor heat-related
illness in soldiers. The bulletin includes recommended acclimatization
planning, work-rest cycles, fluid and electrolyte replacement, and
limitations on work based on WBGT (Department of the Army, 2022).
[[Page 70707]]
As of April 2024, five States have promulgated heat standards
requiring employers in various industries and workplace settings to
implement protections to reduce the risk of heat-related injuries and
illnesses for their employees: California, Minnesota, Oregon,
Washington, and Colorado. In addition, Maryland and California are
currently engaged in rulemaking. State standards differ in the scope of
coverage (see tables III-1 and 2). For example, Minnesota's standard
covers only indoor workplaces. California and Washington standards
cover only outdoor workplaces, although California's proposal would
include coverage of indoor workplaces. Oregon's rule covers both indoor
and outdoor workplaces. State rules also differ in the methods used for
triggering protections against hazardous heat. Minnesota's standard
considers the type of work being performed (light, moderate, or heavy)
and provides WBGT trigger levels based on the type of work activity.
California's heat-illness prevention protections go into effect at an
ambient temperature of 80 [deg]F. Washington's rule also relies on
ambient temperature readings combined with considerations for the
breathability of workers' clothing. Oregon's rule uses a heat index 80
[deg]F as a trigger.
California, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon all have additional
protections that are triggered by high heat. However, they differ as to
the trigger for these additional protections. In California, high heat
protections are triggered at an ambient temperature reading of 95
[deg]F (and only apply in certain industries). In Washington, high heat
protections are triggered at an ambient temperature reading of 90
[deg]F. In Colorado, additional protections are triggered at an ambient
temperature reading of 95 [deg]F or by other factors such as unhealthy
air quality, length of workday, heaviness of clothing or gear, and
acclimatization status. These additional protections only apply to the
agricultural industry. Finally, in Oregon, high heat protections are
triggered at a heat index of 90 [deg]F.
All the State standards require training for employees and
supervisors. All the State standards, except for Minnesota, require
employers to provide at least one quart of water per hour for each
employee, require some form of emergency response plan, include
provisions related to acclimatization for workers, and require access
to shaded break areas. Washington and Oregon require that employers
provide training in a language that the workers understand. Similarly,
California's standard requires that employers create a written heat-
illness prevention plan in English as well as in whatever other
language is understood by the majority of workers at a given workplace.
California also requires close monitoring of new employees for the
first fourteen days and monitoring of all employees during a heat wave.
Table III-1 below provides an overview of the provisions included in
the existing and proposed State standards on heat injury and illness
prevention. Table III-2 provides an overview of the additional
provisions required when the high heat trigger is met or exceeded.
Table III-1--Initial Heat Triggers and Provisions in State Heat Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shade or
Threshold Provision of cool-down Rest breaks Emergency Acclimatization Training Heat illness prevention Observation/
water means if needed response plan supervision
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California: Outdoor................... 80 [deg]F (Ambient) \1\.. ................ ............
Washington: Outdoor................... 80 [deg]F (Ambient), All (accident ............
other clothing; 52 prevention).
[deg]F, Non-breathable
clothes.
Colorado: Agriculture................. 80 [deg]F (Ambient)...... ........................
California (proposal): Indoor......... 82 [deg]F (Ambient)...... ................ ............
Maryland (proposal): Indoor & Outdoor. 80 [deg]F (Heat Index)... ............ ................ ............
Minnesota: \2\ Indoor................. 86 [deg]F (WBGT), Light ............ ............ ............ ............ ............... ........................ ............
work; 80 [deg]F,
Moderate work; 77
[deg]F, Heavy work.
Oregon: Indoor & Outdoor.............. 80 [deg]F (Heat Index)... ............ ................ ............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some provisions, including water, emergency response, training, and heat illness prevention plan, apply to covered employers regardless of the temperature threshold.
\2\ Minnesota uses a 2-hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit rather than a trigger.
Table III-2--High Heat Triggers and Additional Provisions in State Heat Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
Threshold Work-rest Observation/ Pre-shift and control
schedule supervision meetings measures \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional High Heat Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California: Outdoor \2\....... 95 [deg]F (only ........ ............
(Ambient). agriculture).
Washington: Outdoor........... 90 [deg]F ........ ........ ............ ............
(Ambient).
Colorado: Agriculture......... 95 [deg]F ........ covered in ............
(Ambient) or general
other condition provisions
\3\. above.
California (proposal): Indoor. 87 [deg]F ................ ................ ............
(Ambient or
Heat Index) or
other
conditions \4\.
Maryland (proposal): Indoor & 90 [deg]F (Heat ........ ........ ............ ............
Outdoor. Index).
Oregon: Indoor & Outdoor...... 90 [deg]F (Heat ........ ........ ............ ............
Index).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Assessment and control measures include measuring temperature and heat index, identifying and evaluating all
other environmental risk factors for heat illness, and using specified control measures to minimize the risk
of heat illness.
[[Page 70708]]
\2\ High heat procedures apply in agriculture; construction; landscaping; oil and gas extraction; transportation
or delivery of agricultural products, construction materials or other heavy materials, except for employment
that consists of operating an air-conditioned vehicle and does not include loading or unloading.
\3\ Other conditions include unhealthy air quality, shifts over 12 hours, heavy clothing or gear required, or
the employee is new or returning from absence.
\4\ Other conditions include wearing clothing that restricts heat removal, or working in a high radiant heat
area, when the ambient temperature is at or above 82 [deg]F.
IV. Health Effects
A. Introduction
I. Health Effects of Occupational Heat Exposure
Exposure to workplace heat can be seriously detrimental to workers'
health and safety and, in some cases, can be fatal. Workplace heat
contributes to heat stress, which is a person's total heat load (NIOSH,
2016) from the following sources combined: (1) heat from the
environment, including heat generated by equipment or machinery; (2)
metabolic heat generated through body movement, which is proportional
to one's relative level of exertion (Sawka et al., 1993; Astrand 1960);
and (3) heat retained due to clothing or personal protective equipment
(PPE), which is highly dependent on the breathability of the clothing
and PPE worn (Bernard et al., 2017). Heat is routinely an occupation-
specific risk because, for example, workers may experience greater heat
stress than non-workers, particularly when they are required to work
through shifts with prolonged heat exposure, complete tasks that
require physical exertion, and/or their employers do not take adequate
steps to protect them from exposure to hazardous heat. In addition,
many work operations require the use of PPE. PPE can increase heat
stress and can reduce workers' heat tolerance by decreasing the body's
ability to cool down. Workers may also face pressure, or
incentivization through pay structures (e.g., piece-rate, bonuses), to
work through hazardous heat. Pressure to produce results and be seen as
a good worker can have a direct impact on worker self-care choices that
impact health (Wadsworth et al., 2019). Pay structures and production
quotas intended to motivate workers may also compromise worker safety
(Iglesias-Rios et al., 2023). These pressures can increase their risk
of heat-related injury and illness (Billikopf and Norton, 1992;
Johansson et al., 2010; Spector et al., 2015; Pan et al., 2021). The
body's response to heat stress is called heat strain (NIOSH, 2016). As
the heat stress a person experiences increases, the body attempts to
cool itself by releasing heat into the surrounding environment. If the
body begins to acquire heat faster than it can release it, the body
will store heat. As stored heat accumulates, the body can show signs of
excessive heat strain, such as increased core temperature and heart
rate, as well as symptoms of heat strain, such as sweating, dizziness,
or nausea.
Two large meta-analyses (n=2,409 and n=11,582) \1\ have confirmed
that occupational heat exposure is associated with both signs and
symptoms of heat strain (Ioannou et al., 2022; Flouris et al., 2018).
In one, the authors found a high prevalence of heat strain (35%) among
workers in hot conditions, defined by the authors as WBGT greater than
26 [deg]C (78.8 [deg]F); they also found that workers in hot conditions
were four times more likely to experience signs and symptoms of heat
strain than workers in more moderate conditions (Flouris et al., 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the Health Effects section, OSHA refers to statistics
that were reported by authors when describing results from their
research studies. These include the sample size (n), the odds ratio
(OR), the confidence interval (CI), and the p-value (p). These
statistics provide information about effect size, error, and
statistical significance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Literature Review for Health Effects Section
OSHA conducted a non-systematic review of the medical and
scientific literature to identify evidence on the relationship between
heat exposure and illnesses and death. OSHA's literature review focused
on meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and studies cited in NIOSH's
Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Heat and
Hot Environments, published in 2016. OSHA separately searched for
additional meta-analyses and systematic reviews that were not cited in
the NIOSH Criteria document, including those that were published after
the document was released (i.e., 2016 and on).
OSHA also reviewed sentinel epidemiological evidence including
observational, experimental, and randomized controlled studies. OSHA
primarily reviewed epidemiological studies focusing on worker
populations, athletes, and military members, but also included studies
in non-worker populations where appropriate. For example, when there
was limited occupation-specific research or data for some heat-related
health effects, OSHA sometimes considered general population studies as
they relate to understanding physiological mechanisms of heat-related
illness, severity of an illness, and prognosis. In addition to the
evidence of heat-related illnesses and deaths, OSHA reviewed a large
body of evidence that evaluated the association of occupational heat
exposure with workplace injuries such as falls, collisions, and other
accidents. OSHA also reviewed evidence regarding individual factors
such as age, medication use, and certain medical conditions that may
affect one's risk for heat-related health effects.
III. Summary
The best available evidence in the scientific and medical
literature, as summarized in this Health Effects section, demonstrates
that occupational heat exposure can result in death; illnesses,
including heat stroke, heat exhaustion, heat syncope, rhabdomyolysis,
heat cramps, hyponatremia, heat edema, and heat rash; and heat-related
injuries, including falls, collisions, and other workplace accidents.
B. General Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health Effects
This section briefly describes the mechanisms of heat-related
health effects, i.e., how the body's physiological responses to heat
exposure can lead to the heat-related health effects identified in
OSHA's literature review. More detailed information about the
mechanisms underpinning each specific heat-related health effect is
described in the relevant subsections that follow.
As explained above, occupational heat exposure contributes to heat
stress. The resulting bodily responses are collectively referred to as
heat strain (Cramer and Jay, 2016). The bodily responses included in
heat strain serve to decrease stored heat by increasing heat loss to
the environment to maintain a stable body temperature (NIOSH, 2016).
When the brain recognizes that the body is storing heat, it activates
the autonomic nervous system to initiate cooling (Kellogg et al., 1995;
Wyss et al., 1974). Blood is shunted towards the skin and vasodilation
begins, meaning that the blood vessels near the skin's surface become
wider, thereby increasing blood flow near the surface of the skin
(Kamijo et al., 2005; Hough and Ballantyne, 1899). The autonomic
nervous system also triggers the body's sweat response, in which sweat
glands release water to wet the skin (Roddie et al., 1957; Grant and
Holling, 1938). These processes allow the body to cool in four ways:
(1) radiation, i.e., when heat is released directly into the
[[Page 70709]]
surrounding air; (2) convection, i.e., when there is air movement that
moves heat away from the body; (3) evaporation, i.e., when sweat on the
skin diffuses into surrounding air (as clothing/PPE permits) and (4)
conduction, i.e., when heat is directly transferred through contact
with a cooler surface (e.g., wearing an ice-containing vest (Cramer and
Jay, 2016; Leon and Kenefick, 2012)).
Importantly, the extent of heat release through radiation,
convection, and evaporation depends on environmental conditions such as
the speed of air flow, temperature, and relative humidity (Clifford et
al., 1959; Brebner et al., 1958). For example, when relative humidity
is high, sweat is less likely to evaporate off the skin, which
significantly reduces the cooling effect of evaporation. Additionally,
when sweat remains on the skin and irritates the sweat glands, it can
cause a condition known as heat rash, whereby itchy red clusters of
pimples or blisters develop on the skin (DiBeneditto and Worobec, 1985;
Sulzberger and Griffin, 1968).
While the purpose of the sweat response is to cool the body, in
doing so, it can deplete the body's stores of water and electrolytes
(e.g., sodium [Na], potassium [K], chloride [Cl], calcium [Ca], and
magnesium [Mg]) that are essential for normal bodily function
(Shirreffs and Maughan, 1997). The condition resulting from abnormally
low sodium levels is known as hyponatremia. When stores of electrolytes
are depleted, painful muscle spasms known as heat cramps can occur
(Kamijo and Nose, 2006). Additionally, depletion of the body's stored
water causes dehydration, which is known to reduce the body's
circulating blood volume (Trangmar and Gonzalez-Alonso, 2017; Dill and
Costill, 1974).
During vasodilation that happens as the body attempts to cool,
blood can pool in areas of the body that are most subject to gravity,
and fluid can seep from blood vessels causing noticeable swelling under
the skin (known as heat edema). Upright standing would further
encourage blood to pool in the legs, and thus, the heart has an even
lower blood volume available for circulation (Smit et al., 1999). A
large reduction in circulating blood volume will lead to (1) a
continued rise in core body temperature, and (2) reduced blood flow to
the brain, muscles, and organs. A rise in core body temperature and
reduced blood flow to the brain can cause neurological disturbances,
such as loss of consciousness, which are characteristic of heat stroke
and heat syncope (Wilson et al., 2006; Van Lieshout et al., 2003). A
rise in core body temperature and reduced blood flow to muscles can
also cause extreme muscle fatigue (to the point of collapse) and muscle
cell damage during exertion, which are characteristic of heat
exhaustion and rhabdomyolysis, respectively (Torres et al., 2015; Nybo
et al., 2014). Finally, a rise in core body temperature and reduced
blood flow to organs can damage multiple vital organs (such as the
heart, liver, and kidneys), which is often observed in heat stroke
(Crandall et al., 2008; O'Donnell and Clowes, 1972). Heat stroke and
rhabdomyolysis can lead to death if not treated properly and promptly.
C. Identifying Cases of Heat-Related Health Effects
In its review of the scientific and medical literature on the
health effects of occupational heat exposure, OSHA found several
studies that relied upon coding systems, in which medical providers or
other public health professionals identify fatalities and non-fatal
cases of various illnesses and injuries, including heat-related
illnesses and injuries (HRIs). The medical and scientific communities
use data from these coding systems to study the incidence and
prevalence of illnesses and injuries, including HRIs. In both this
Health Effects section and Section V., Risk Assessment, OSHA relied on
several studies that make use of data from these coding systems. A
brief summary of each of the major coding systems is provided below.
I. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related
Health Problems (ICD) Codes
The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and
Related Health Problems (ICD) System is under the purview of the World
Health Organization (WHO), an international agency that, as the leading
authority on health and disease, regularly publishes evidence-based
guidelines to advance clinical practice and public health policy. The
ICD System harmonizes the diagnosis of disease across many countries,
and ICD codes are used routinely in the U.S. healthcare system by
medical personnel to record diagnoses in patients' medical records, as
well as to identify cause of death. These codes are utilized as part of
a standardized system for recording diagnoses, as well as organizing
and collecting data into public health surveillance systems. Each ICD
code is a series of letters and/or numbers that corresponds to a highly
specific medical diagnosis. Healthcare providers may record multiple
ICD codes if an individual presents with multiple diagnoses. The ICD
system has multiple codes that medical personnel can use when
diagnosing HRIs.
The ICD system was first developed in the 18th century and was
adopted under the purview of the World Health Organization (WHO) in
1948 (Hirsch et al., 2016). Since then, the ICD system has been revised
11 times--ICD-11 was released in 2022. However, because the ICD-11
system has not yet been implemented in the United States, many of the
epidemiological studies cited throughout this Health Effects section
used the ICD-9 and ICD-10 systems to survey heat-related deaths and
HRIs. Table IV-1 provides a list of heat-related ICD-9 and ICD-10
codes.
Table IV--1--ICD-9 and ICD-10 Codes for Heat-Related Health Effects *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICD-9 code ICD-10 code equivalent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
992 Effects of heat and light.......... T67 Effects of heat and light.
992.0 Heatstroke and sunstroke......... T67.0 Heatstroke and sunstroke.
992.1 Heat syncope..................... T67.1 Heat syncope.
992.2 Heat cramps...................... T67.2 Heat cramp.
992.3 Heat exhaustion, anhydrotic...... T67.3 Heat exhaustion,
anhydrotic.
992.4 Heat exhaustion due to salt T67.4 Heat exhaustion due to
depletion. salt depletion.
992.5 Heat exhaustion, unspecified..... T67.5 Heat exhaustion,
unspecified.
992.6 Heat fatigue, transient.......... T67.6 Heat fatigue, transient.
992.7 Heat edema....................... T67.7 Heat edema.
992.8 Other effects of heat and light.. T67.8 Other effects of heat and
light.
992.9 Effects of heat and light, T67.9 Effects of heat and
unspecified. light, unspecified.
E900 Accident caused by excessive heat. NA.
[[Page 70710]]
E900.0 Accident caused by excessive X30 Exposure to excessive
heat due to weather conditions. natural heat.
E900.1 Accidents due to excessive heat W92 Exposure to excessive heat
of man-made origin. of man-made origin.
E900.9 Accidents due to excessive heat X30 Exposure to excessive
of unspecified origin. natural heat.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The above heat-related codes exclude X32 Exposure to sunlight and
W89 Exposure to man-made radiation, among others.
* These ICD codes are specific to heat as indicated by the names of the
codes. There are additional codes that can be associated with
diagnosed heat illness but may not be specific to heat-related illness
which are not included here but may be included in text where relevant
(e.g., M62.82 for rhabdomyolysis and E87.1 for hypo-osmolality and
hyponatremia).
Various surveillance systems exist to track documentation of ICD
codes. For example, the CDC leverages ICD-10 codes to collect nearly
real-time data on heat-related deaths and HRIs through the National
Syndromic Surveillance System (NSSP). The CDC also uses ICD-10 codes to
collect annual data on heat-related deaths and HRIs, then reports these
data via the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) and National
Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Additionally, all branches of the
U.S. Armed Forces (i.e., Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps) use
ICD-10 codes to document HRIs among service members in the Defense
Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). The US Army also uses ICD-10 codes
to document HRIs in the Total Army Injury and Health Outcomes Database
(TAIHOD) (Bell et al., 2004).
II. Occupational Illness and Injury Classification System (OIICS) Codes
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is a Federal agency,
housed in the Department of Labor, that collects and analyzes data on
the U.S. economy and workforce. In 1992, BLS developed the Occupational
Illness and Injury Classification System (OIICS) to harmonize reporting
of injuries and illnesses that affect U.S. workers. The OIICS is
similar to the ICD system. Each OIICS code is a series of numbers that
specifies a diagnosis (referred to as the nature of an illness or
injury, or a ``nature code'') and event(s) leading to an illness or
injury (referred to as an ``event code''). OIICS was updated in 2010
(Version 2.0), and again in 2022 (Version 3.0); Version 3.0 is the most
up to date version (https://www.bls.gov/iif/definitions/occupational-injuries-and-illnesses-classification-manual.htm; BLS, 2023e). The
OIICS system has multiple codes that can be used when identifying
occupational HRIs. Table IV-2 provides a list of heat-related OIICS
codes (nature and event codes).
Table IV--2--OIICS Codes (Version 3.0) for Heat-Related Health Effects
[dagger]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature Codes:
172 Effects of heat and light.
1720 Effects of heat--unspecified.
1721 Heat stroke, syncope.
1722 Heat exhaustion, fatigue.
1729 Effects of heat--not elsewhere classified.
2893 Prickly heat, heat rash, and other disorders of the sweat
glands including ``miliaria rubra''.
Event Codes:
53 Exposure to temperature extremes.
530 Exposure to temperature extremes--unspecified.
531 Exposure to environmental heat.
5310 Exposure to environmental heat--unspecified.
5311 Exposure to environmental heat--indoor.
5312 Exposure to environmental heat--outdoor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[dagger] Some of the data OSHA relies on uses older versions of OIICS
codes (Versions 1 and 2) but the major categories for heat-related
incidents did not change significantly between versions.
Through a combination of survey staff and a specialized automated
coding system, BLS applies OIICS codes to data collected through their
worker safety and health surveillance systems, the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries (CFOI) and the Survey of Occupational Injuries
and Illnesses (SOII), to identify and document occupational heat-
related deaths and occupational HRIs, respectively. Researchers have
also relied on this system for identifying occupational HRIs (e.g.,
Spector et al., 2016). However, BLS data does not currently specify
discrete codes for all HRIs described in this health effects section.
The CFOI is a cooperative program between the Federal Government and
the States that relies on various administrative records, including
death certificates, to accurately produce counts of fatal work injuries
(BLS, 2012). The CFOI examines all cases marked ``At work'' on the
death certificate, and the CFOI database relies on the death
certificate (among other sources) to ascertain the cause(s) of death.
Further details about BLS reporting using OIICS codes, as well as rates
of HRIs, can be found in Section V., Risk Assessment.
III. Limitations
A limitation to relying on these coding systems to identify heat-
related fatalities and HRIs is underreporting. Numerous studies have
found that HRIs are likely vastly underreported (see Section V., Risk
Assessment). Reasons for the likely underreporting include
underreporting of illness and injuries by workers to their employers
(Kyung et al., 2023), underreporting of injuries and illnesses by
employers to BLS and OSHA (Wuellner and Phipps, 2018; Fagan and
Hodgson, 2017), underutilization of workers' compensation insurance
(Fan et al., 2006; Bonauto et al., 2010), influence of structural
factors and work culture on workers perceptions about seeking help
(Wadsworth et al., 2019; Iglesias-Rios, 2023), and difficulties with
determining heat-related causes of death (e.g., Luber et al., 2006;
Pradhan et al., 2019). As a result, there are likely many heat-related
fatalities and cases of HRIs that are not
[[Page 70711]]
captured in these coding systems. For a more detailed discussion of
underreporting, see Section V., Risk Assessment.
IV. Summary
As demonstrated by these coding systems, in which medical providers
or other public health professionals assign one or more codes to
identify a heat-related fatality or HRI, it is well accepted in the
medical and scientific communities that heat exposure, including
occupational heat exposure, can result in death and HRIs. Indeed, in
its review of the best available scientific and medical literature on
the health effects of occupational heat exposure, OSHA identified
several studies that relied upon data from these coding systems to
determine the incidence or prevalence of heat-related deaths and HRIs
in workers. OSHA relies on these studies in both this Health Effects
section and Section V., Risk Assessment, of this preamble to the
proposed rule.
D. Heat-Related Deaths
I. Introduction
Heat is the deadliest weather phenomenon in the United States (NWS,
2022). Heat as a cause of death is widely recognized in the medical and
scientific communities. Studies investigating relationships between
heat and mortality have long demonstrated positive associations between
heat exposure and increased all-cause mortality (e.g., Weinberger et
al., 2020; Basu and Samet, 2002; Whitman et al., 1997). As explained
below, the connection between heat exposure, the body's physiological
responses, and death (i.e., heat-related death mechanisms) is clearly
established. Exposure to occupational heat can be fatal. According to
BLS's CFOI, occupational heat exposure has killed 1,042 U.S. workers
between 1992-2022 (BLS, 2024c).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Death caused by exposure to heat can occur in occupational settings
if the worker's body is not able to adequately cool in response to heat
exposure or if treatment for symptoms of heat-related illness is not
provided promptly. Nearly all body systems can be negatively affected
by heat exposure. Mora et al. (2017) systematically reviewed
mechanistic studies on heat-related deaths and identified five harmful
physiological mechanisms triggered by heat exposure that can lead to
death: ischemia (inadequate blood flow), heat cytotoxicity (damage to
and breakdown of cells), inflammatory response (inflammation that
disrupts cell and organ function), disseminated intravascular
coagulation (widespread dysfunction of blood clotting mechanisms), and
rhabdomyolysis (breakdown of muscle tissue). These mechanisms, with the
exception of rhabdomyolysis, are associated with the development of
heat stroke. Rhabdomyolysis, which is a potentially fatal illness
resulting from the breakdown of muscle tissue, can also occur in
conjunction with or in the absence of heat stroke. For a more detailed
discussion on rhabdomyolysis, see Section IV.H., Rhabdomyolysis. Mora
et al. (2017) also identified seven vital organs that can be critically
impacted by heat exposure--the brain, heart, kidneys, lungs, pancreas,
intestines, and liver. Across the five identified mechanisms and seven
vital organs, Mora et al. (2017) found medical evidence for twenty-
seven pathways whereby physiological mechanisms triggered by heat
exposure could lead to organ failure and fatality.
The most common cause of heat-related occupational deaths is heat
stroke. Heat stroke is a potentially fatal dysregulation of multiple
physiological processes and organ systems resulting in widespread organ
damage. Heat stroke is typically marked by significant elevation in
core body temperature and cognitive impairment due to central nervous
system damage. The physiological mechanisms involved in the development
and progression of heat stroke are discussed in more detail in Section
IV.E., Heat Stroke.
III. Determining Heat as a Cause of Death
The identification of deaths caused by heat exposure can take place
in a few different ways. Healthcare professionals may identify heat-
related deaths in medical settings. For example, a heat-related death
may be identified if an individual experiencing heat stroke presents to
an emergency room and then later dies. The heat-related nature of the
death should be documented by the healthcare professional in the chief
complaint field during medical history taking and selection of relevant
ICD diagnosis codes. The ICD system allows for identification of heat
as either an underlying cause of death or a significant contributing
condition. The ICD-10 instruction manual defines underlying cause as
``(a) the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events
leading directly to death, or (b) the circumstances of the accident or
violence which produced the fatal injury'' (WHO, 2016, p. 31). A
significant contributing condition is defined as a condition that
``contributed to the fatal outcome, but was not related to the disease
or condition directly causing death'' (WHO, 2004, p. 24).
Medical examiners or coroners can also identify heat as a cause of
death or significant condition contributing to death during death
investigations, which should be noted on the deceased individual's
death certificate. The National Association of Medical Examiners
(NAME), a professional organization for medical examiners, forensic
pathologists, and medicolegal affiliates and administrators, defines
``heat-related death'' as ``a death in which exposure to high ambient
temperature either caused the death or significantly contributed to
it'' (Donoghue et al., 1997). This definition was developed in an
effort to standardize the way in which heat-related deaths were
identified and documented on death certificates. According to the NAME
definition, cause is ascertained based on circumstances of the death,
investigative reports of high environmental temperature (e.g., a known
heat wave), or a pre-death temperature >=105 [deg]F. Cause is also
indicated in cases where the person may have a lower body temperature
due to attempted cooling measures, but where the individual had a
history of mental status changes and specific toxicological findings of
elevated muscle and liver enzymes. Heat may be designated as a
``significant contributing condition'' if: (1) ``antemortem body
temperature cannot be established but the environmental temperature at
the time of collapse was high''; and/or (2) heat stress exacerbated a
pre-existing disease, in which case heat and the pre-existing disease
would be listed as the cause and significant contributing condition,
respectively, or vice versa. Importantly, Donoghue et al. note ``The
diagnosis of heat-related death is based principally on investigative
information; autopsy findings are nonspecific.'' (Donoghue et al.,
1997). While this definition is the official definition of this
professional organization, other definitions or processes for
determining whether or not a death is heat-related may be used.
Additionally, there are processes in place to identify and document
deaths that are work-related. Death certificates include a field that
can be checked for ``injury at work'' (Russell and Conroy, 1991).
Further, work-related fatalities due to heat are identified and
documented through the CFOI (for more details, see Section IV.C.,
Overview of ICD and OIICS Codes for Heat-Related Health Effects).
[[Page 70712]]
IV. Occupational Heat-Related Deaths
Occupational heat exposure has led to worker fatalities in both
indoor and outdoor work settings and across a variety of industries,
occupations, and job tasks (Petitti et al., 2013; Arbury et al., 2014;
Gubernot et al., 2015; NIOSH, 2016; Harduar Morano and Watkins, 2017).
BLS's CFOI identified 1,042 U.S. worker deaths due to heat exposure
between 1992 and 2022, with an average of 34 fatalities per year during
that period (BLS, 2024c). Between 2011 and 2022, BLS reports 479 worker
deaths (BLS, 2024c). During the latest three years for which BLS
reports data (2020-2022), there was an average of 45 work-related
deaths due to exposure to environmental heat per year (BLS, 2024c).
However, for the reasons explained in Section V., Risk Assessment,
these statistics likely do not capture the true magnitude and
prevalence of heat-related fatalities because of underreporting.
There are numerous case studies documenting the circumstances under
which occupational heat exposure led to death among workers. For
example, in three NIOSH Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluations
(FACE) investigations of worker fatalities, workers died of heat stroke
after not receiving prompt treatment upon symptom onset (NIOSH, 2004;
NIOSH, 2007; NIOSH, 2015). Another case report of a farmworker who died
due to heat stroke indicates that confusion the worker experienced as a
result of heat exposure may have played a role in his ability to seek
help (Luginbuhl et al., 2008). Additional case reports show workers
have collapsed and later died while working alone, such as in mail
delivery (Shaikh, 2023), and that worker distress has been interpreted
as drug use as opposed to symptoms of heat illness (Alsharif, 2023).
V. Summary
OSHA's review of the scientific and medical literature indicates
that occupational heat exposure can and does cause death. The
physiological mechanisms by which heat exposure can result in death are
clearly established in the literature, and heat exposure being a cause
of death is widely recognized in the medical and scientific
communities. Indeed, occupational surveillance data demonstrates that
numerous work-related deaths from occupational heat exposure occur
every year.
E. Heat Stroke
I. Introduction
Among HRIs, the most serious and deadly illness from occupational
heat exposure is heat stroke. NIOSH (2016) defines heat stroke as ``an
acute medical emergency caused by exposure to heat from an excessive
rise in body temperature [above 41.1 [deg]C (106 [deg]F)] and failure
of the [body's] temperature-regulating mechanism.'' When this happens,
an individual's central nervous system is affected, which can result in
a sudden and sustained loss of consciousness preceded by symptoms
including vertigo, nausea, headache, cerebral dysfunction, bizarre
behavior, and excessive body temperature (NIOSH 2016).
Because progression of symptoms varies and involves central nervous
system function, it may be difficult for individuals, or those they are
with, to know when they are experiencing serious heat illness or to
understand that they need urgent medical care (Alsharif, 2023). If not
treated promptly, early symptoms of heat stroke may progress to
seizures, coma, and death (Bouchama et al., 2022). Thus, heat stroke is
often referred to as a life-threatening form of hyperthermia (i.e.,
elevated core body temperature) because it can cause damage to multiple
organs such as the liver and kidneys. Of note, the term ``stroke'' in
``heat stroke'' is a misnomer in that it does not involve a blockage or
hemorrhage of blood flow to the brain.
There are two types of heat stroke: classic heat stroke (CHS) and
exertional heat stroke (EHS). CHS can occur without any activity or
physical exertion, whereas EHS occurs as a result of physical activity.
CHS typically occurs in environmental conditions where ambient
temperature and humidity are high and is most often reported during
heat waves (Bouchama et al., 2022). It is most likely to affect young
children and the elderly (Laitano et al., 2019). Studies have found
that EHS can occur with any amount of physical exertion, even within
the first 60 minutes of exertion (Epstein and Yanovich, 2019; Garcia et
al., 2022). Additionally, EHS can occur in healthy individuals who
would otherwise be considered low risk performing physical activity,
regardless of hot or cool environmental conditions (Periard et al.,
2022; Epstein et al., 1999).
Cases of heat stroke can be identified in a few ways. Medical
personnel who make a formal diagnosis of heat stroke record the
corresponding ICD code in the patient's medical record. Medical
examiners also identify heat stroke as a cause of death or significant
condition contributing to death and note it on the deceased
individual's death certificate.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Heat stroke happens when the body is under severe heat stress and
is unable to dissipate excessive heat to keep the body temperature at
37 [deg]C (98.6 [deg]F), resulting in an elevated core body temperature
(Epstein and Yanovich, 2019). The hallmark characteristics of heat
stroke are: (1) central nervous system (CNS) dysfunction, including
encephalopathy (i.e., brain dysfunction manifesting as irrational
behavior, confusion, coma, or convulsions); and (2) damage to multiple
organs, including the kidneys, liver, heart, pancreas, gastrointestinal
tract, as well as the circulatory system. There are three accepted
mechanisms through which heat exposure can cause CNS dysfunction and/or
multi-organ damage (Bouchama et al., 2022; Garcia et al., 2022; Iba et
al., 2022). All three mechanisms share a common origin: heat exposure
contributes to excessive heat stress, which results in hyperthermia.
One mechanism of heat stroke is reduced cerebral blood velocity
(CBV) (an indicator of blood flow to the brain) that results in
orthostatic intolerance (i.e., the inability to remain upright without
symptoms) (Wilson et al., 2006). As individuals experience whole body
heating, CBV is reduced and cerebral vascular resistance (the ratio of
carbon dioxide stimulus to cerebral blood flow) increases. These
changes ultimately contribute to reduced cerebral perfusion (flow of
blood from the circulatory system to cerebral tissue) and blood flow,
as well as orthostatic intolerance (Wilson et al., 2006).
Another mechanism is damage to the vascular endothelium.
Hyperthermia can damage or kill cells in the lining of blood vessels,
known as the vascular endothelium. The body responds to vascular
endothelium damage through a process called disseminated intravascular
coagulation (DIC). DIC is characterized by two processes: (1) tiny
clots form in the tissues of multiple organs, and (2) bleeding occurs
at the sites of those tiny clots. DIC is extremely damaging and results
in injury to organs (Bouchama and Knochel, 2002). Namely, DIC limits
the delivery of oxygen and nutrients to several organs including the
brain, heart, kidneys, and liver. Thus, DIC can result in both CNS
dysfunction and multi-organ damage. Additionally, damage to the
vascular endothelium makes it more permeable and creates an imbalance
in the substances that control blood clotting,
[[Page 70713]]
which promotes abnormal and increased blood clotting (Bouchama and
Knochel, 2002; Wang et al., 2022).
A third mechanism is damage to the cells in the lining of the gut,
known as the gut epithelium. Hyperthermia can alter the cell membranes'
permeability (Roti Roti et al., 2008), or directly cause cells to die
(Bynum et al., 1978). In either case, cells in the gut epithelium will
leak endotoxins into the blood, a process known as endotoxemia. When
these endotoxins circulate throughout the body, the immune system
aggressively responds by activating cells to fight infection and
inflammation, known as systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS)
(Leon and Helwig, 2010). The presence of endotoxins, as well as the
body's aggressive immune response, can cause serious multi-organ damage
(Epstein and Yanovich, 2019; Wang et al., 2022). In particular, the
liver is usually one of the first organs to be damaged and is often
what causes a heat stroke death (Wang et al., 2022).
III. Occupational Heat Stroke
Heat stroke is life-threatening and can severely impair workers'
safety and health (Lucas et al., 2014). A study of work-related HRIs in
Florida using hospital data reported that, during the warm seasons from
May through October between 2005 through 2012, heat stroke was the
primary diagnosis in 91% (21 of 23) of deaths. In total, they reported
160 cases of work-related heat stroke (Harduar Morano and Watkins,
2017). Analyses of heat stroke among military members indicate that
roughly 73% of EHS patients require hospitalization for at least two
days (Carter et al., 2007).
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Heat stroke is a serious medical emergency that requires immediate
rest, cooling, and usually hospitalization. Prognosis for heat stroke
is highly dependent on how quickly heat stroke is recognized and how
quickly an affected worker can be cooled. When an affected person can
be diagnosed early and cooled rapidly, the prognosis is generally good.
For example, rapid cooling within one hour of presentation of symptoms
of CHS was found to reduce the mortality rate from 33% to 15% (Vicario
et al., 1986). For EHS, cooling the body below 104 [deg]F within 30
minutes of collapse is associated with very good outcomes (Casa et al.,
2012; Casa et al., 2015). The authors also reported that they were
unaware of any cases of fatalities among EHS victims where it was
recorded that the body was cooled below 104 [deg]F within 30 minutes of
collapse (Casa et al., 2012).
Comparably, others have found that the risk of morbidity and
mortality from heat stroke increases as treatment is delayed (Demartini
et al., 2015; Schlader et al., 2022). Schlader et al. (2022) found that
a delay in cooling can result in tissue damage, multi-organ
dysfunction, and eventually death. Similarly, Zeller et al. (2011)
found in their retrospective cohort study that patients who did not
receive early or immediate cooling had worse outcomes, such as more
severe forms of disease or death, although their study design does not
allow for conclusions regarding causality (Zeller et al., 2011).
Khogali and Weiner's (1980) case study report on 18 cases of heat
stroke found that 72% of the patients took between 30-90 minutes to
cool, whereas the other 28% were resistant to cooling, taking two to
five hours to reach 38 [deg]C (100.4 [deg]F). This means that there is
variation in how individuals respond to heat stroke treatment and that
some individuals will respond quicker to treatment than others. Prompt
treatment is likely even more critical for the individuals who take
longer to cool.
Data from the general population also demonstrate the serious
nature of heat stroke. One analysis of nationwide data estimated that
nearly 55% of emergency department visits for heat stroke required
hospitalization and roughly 3.5% of patients died in the emergency
department or at the hospital (Wu et al., 2014). This study also found
that heat stroke medical emergencies are more severe than other non-
heat-related emergencies, with a 2.6-fold increase in admission rate
and a 4.8-fold increase in case fatality compared to those other
conditions (Wu et al., 2014).
Complete recovery for individuals who are affected by heat stroke
may require time away from work. Some research suggests the length of
recovery time and the need for time away from work is based on how long
a person was at or above the critical core body temperature of 41
[deg]C (105.8 [deg]F), and how long it takes for biomarkers in blood to
normalize (McDermott et al., 2007). Relevant biomarkers include those
for acute liver dysfunction, myolysis (the breakdown of muscle tissue),
and other organ system biomarkers (Ward et al., 2020; Schlader et al.,
2022).
Guidelines for military personnel and athletes suggest that it may
be weeks or months before a worker who has suffered heat stroke can
safely return to work or perform the same level of work they did before
suffering heat stroke. U.S. military members have clear return-to-work
protocols post-heat stroke where members are assigned grades of
functional capacity in six areas: physical capacity or stamina, upper
extremities, lower extremities, hearing and ears, eyes, and psychiatric
functioning (O'Connor et al., 2007). For example, when a soldier/airman
experiences heat stroke, they automatically receive a reduced function
capacity grade status in physical capacity. This also results in an
automatic referral to a medical examination board. Soldiers and airmen
are not cleared to return to duty until their laboratory results
normalize, and even then, their status remains a trial of duty. If the
individual has not exhibited any heat intolerance after three months,
they are returned to a normal work schedule. However, maximal exertion
and significant heat exposure remains prohibited for these individuals.
If a military member experiences any heat intolerance during the period
of restriction, or subsequent resumption to normal duty, a referral to
the physical examination board for a hearing regarding their health
status is required (O'Connor et al., 2007).
The U.S. Navy has its own set of guidelines, which does not
distinguish between heat exhaustion and heat stroke, but uses
laboratory tests, especially liver function tests, to determine when
sailors are allowed to return to duty. For those who have suffered heat
stroke, full return to duty is usually not granted until somewhere
between two days to three weeks later (O'Connor et al., 2007).
In 2023, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) published
their consensus statement which provides evidence-based strategies to
reduce and eliminate HRIs, including a return to activity protocol for
athletes recovering from EHS (Roberts et al., 2023). Of note, ACSM
names athletes (whether elite, recreational, or tactical) and
occupational laborers as groups who are active and regularly perform
exertional activities that could lead to EHS. Specifically, ACSM
recommendations include refraining from exercise for at least seven
days following release from the initial medical care for EHS treatment.
Once all laboratory results and vital signs have normalized, ACSM
recommends an individual can exercise in cool environments and
gradually increase duration, intensity, and heat exposure over a two to
four-week period to initiate environmental acclimatization (Roberts et
al., 2023). If the affected athlete does not return to pre-EHS activity
levels within four to six weeks, further medical evaluation is needed.
ACSM recommends a full return to
[[Page 70714]]
activity between two to four weeks after the individual has
demonstrated exercise acclimatization and heat tolerance with no
abnormal symptoms or test results during the re-acclimatization period
(Roberts et al., 2023). Similarly, the National Athletic Trainer's
Association proposes that individuals who experience EHS should
complete a 7 to 21-day rest period, be asymptomatic, have normal blood-
work values, and obtain a physician's clearance prior to beginning a
gradual return to activity (Casa et al., 2015).
In the military setting it is accepted that returning to work too
early and/or without adequate work restrictions can result in
incomplete recovery from heat stroke, which may necessitate a prolonged
restricted work status (McDermott et al., 2007). About 10-20% of people
who have had heat stroke have been shown to experience heat intolerance
roughly two months after having the heat stroke (Binkley et al., 2002).
In some instances, this has lasted for five years and has increased the
risk for another heat stroke (Binkley et al., 2002; McDermott et al.,
2007). Similarly, a case study report of EHS cases amongst the U.S.
Army found that in one of the ten cases examined, the person was heat
intolerant for 11.5 months post-EHS (Armstrong et al., 1989).
Only a limited number of studies have focused on the long-term
effects of heat stroke. This includes research by Wallace et al.
(2007), whose retrospective review of military service members found
that those who suffered an EHS event earlier in life were more likely
to die due to cardiovascular disease and ischemic heart disease.
Similarly, Wang et al. (2019) report that prior exertional heat illness
was associated with a higher prevalence of acute ischemic stroke, acute
myocardial infarction, and an almost three-fold higher prevalence of
chronic kidney disease. Other research in mice support these claims and
indicate that epigenetic effects post-EHS result in immunosuppression
and an altered heat shock protein response as well as development of
metabolic disorders that could negatively impact long-term
cardiovascular health (Murray et al., 2020; Laitano et al., 2020).
V. Summary
OSHA's review of the scientific and medical literature indicates
that occupational heat exposure can cause heat stroke, a medical
emergency. The physiological mechanisms by which heat exposure can
result in heat stroke are well-established in the literature, and heat
exposure as a cause of heat stroke is well-recognized in the medical
and scientific communities. The best available research demonstrates
that heat stroke must be treated as soon as possible and that prolonged
time between experiencing heat stroke and seeking treatment increases
the likelihood of death and may result in long-term health effects.
F. Heat Exhaustion
I. Introduction
NIOSH defines heat exhaustion as ``[a] heat-related illness
characterized by elevation of core body temperature above 38 [deg]C
(100.4 [deg]F) and abnormal performance of one or more organ systems,
without injury to the central nervous system'' (NIOSH, 2016). Heat
exhaustion can progress to heat stroke if not treated properly and
promptly, and may require time away from work for a full recovery.
Signs and symptoms of heat exhaustion typically include profuse
sweating, changes in mental status, dizziness, nausea, headache,
irritability, weakness, decreased urine output and elevated core body
temperature up to 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F) (NIOSH, 2016; Kenny et al.,
2018). Collapse may or may not occur. Significant injury to the central
nervous system, and significant inflammatory response do not occur
during heat exhaustion. However, there appears to be a fine line
between heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Kenny et al. 2018 state that
it can be difficult to clinically differentiate between heat exhaustion
and early heat stroke. NIOSH also states that heat exhaustion ``may
signal impending heat stroke'' (NIOSH, 2016). Armstrong et al. (2007)
recommend that rectal temperature be taken to distinguish between heat
exhaustion and heat stroke.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Heat exhaustion occurs when heat stress results in elevated body
temperature between 98.6 [deg]F and 104 [deg]F (37 [deg]C and 40
[deg]C) and physiological changes occur (Kenny et al., 2018). Under
these significant heat stress conditions, heavy sweating occurs, tissue
perfusion is reduced, and inflammatory mediators are released.
Electrolyte imbalances can occur due to fluid and electrolyte losses
through sweating paired with inadequate replenishment. Voluntary and
involuntary dehydration can exacerbate this process (Hendrie et al.,
1997; Brake and Bates, 2003). ``Voluntary dehydration,'' as used by
Brake and Bates, refers to the circumstance where a dehydrated worker
does not adequately rehydrate, despite the availability of water. Upon
review of several studies, Kenny et al. (2018) report that dehydration
among workers is common, even when water is readily available. There is
also evidence that even when water intake increases, as sweat rate and
dehydration increase, intake may not be adequate to fully replace
losses (Hendrie et al., 1997).
Brake and Bates (2003) summarized various hypothesized reasons for
voluntary and involuntary dehydration. One hypothesized reason for
voluntary dehydration is a delayed or decreased thirst response (Brake
and Bates, 2003). Other reasons include mechanisms that affect fluid
retention, such as the dependence of fluid retention on solutes such as
sodium, which may be in imbalance under heat stress (Brake and Bates,
2003). Lack of adequate hydration could also be due to workplace
pressures or concerns about sanitation (Rao, 2007; Iglesias-Rios,
2023).
The combination of heat stress, upright posture, and low vascular
fluid volume (hypovolemia) can further dysregulate the circulatory
system and affect clotting mechanisms (Kenny et al., 2018). Heat stress
reduces blood flow to the abdominal organs, kidneys, muscles, and brain
and increases blood flow to the skin to aid in cooling. These changes
in the circulatory system and blood flow to the brain can potentially
lead to dizziness or faintness upon standing (orthostatic intolerance),
or collapse. Other factors that affect the development of heat
exhaustion include individual health status, preparedness (such as
acclimatization level), individual characteristics, knowledge, access
to fluids, environmental factors, personal protective equipment use and
work pacing and intensity (Kenny, 2018).
III. Occupational Heat Exhaustion
Heat exhaustion is one of the more common heat-related illnesses
(Armstrong et al., 2007; Harduar Morano and Watkins, 2017; Lewandowski
and Shaman, 2022). In their study of heat-illness hospitalizations in
Florida during May to October from 2005-2012, Harduar Morano and
Watkins (2017) reported that there were 2,659 cases of work-related
heat exhaustion that resulted in emergency department visits or
hospitalization, versus 181 cases of work-related heat stroke that
resulted in emergency department visits, hospitalization, or death.
Similar results have been reported in studies of heat-related illness
among the United States Armed Forces and miners showing the frequency
of heat exhaustion (Dickinson, 1994; Armed Forces Health Surveillance
Division, 2022b;
[[Page 70715]]
Lewandowski and Shaman, 2022; Donoghue et al., 2000; Donoghue, 2004).
While in some studies heat exhaustion is not specifically diagnosed,
several qualitative studies describe self-reported symptoms in workers
that may be indicative of heat exhaustion (e.g., Mirabelli et al.,
2010; Fleischer et al., 2013; Kearney et al., 2016; Mutic et al.,
2018). These symptoms included headache, nausea, vomiting, feeling
faint, and heavy sweating.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Heat exhaustion may require treatment beyond basic first aid to
prevent progression to heat stroke (Kenny et al., 2018). In cases where
the degree of severity of heat illness is unclear, the individual
should be treated as if they have heat stroke (Armstrong, 1989). For a
worker experiencing heat exhaustion, NIOSH recommends the following
steps to ensure the worker receives proper and adequate treatment:
``Take worker to a clinic or emergency room for medical evaluation and
treatment; If medical care is unavailable, call 911; Someone should
stay with worker until help arrives; Remove worker from hot area and
give liquids to drink; Remove unnecessary clothing, including shoes and
socks; Cool the worker with cold compresses or have the worker wash
head, face, and neck with cold water; Encourage frequent sips of cool
water'' (NIOSH, 2016).
Complete recovery from heat exhaustion may require a restricted
work status (or limited work duties). Donoghue et al. (2000) reported
that following heat exhaustion, 29% (22 of 77) of miners included in
the study required a restricted work status for at least one shift. The
military has specific protocols for return to duty following heat
exhaustion. For example, the U.S. Army and Air Force follow the
protocol outlines in AR 40-501 (O'Connor et al., 2007). Three instances
of heat exhaustion in less than 24 months can result in referral to a
Medical Evaluation Board before a full return to service. Some military
units have additional or more specific guidelines. For example, one
military unit, at Womack Army Medical Center in North Carolina, has
guidelines that allow individuals who are considered to have mild
illness, fully recovered in the emergency room, and have no abnormal
laboratory findings to return to light duty the following day and
limited duty the day after that. However, they also indicate that some
effects of heat illness may be subtle or delayed and recommend
individuals avoid strenuous exercise for several days and remain under
observation (O'Connor et al., 2007).
V. Summary
The scientific and medical literature presented here clearly
demonstrate that heat exhaustion is a recognized health effect of
occupational heat exposure. The best available evidence on the
symptoms, treatment, and recovery of heat exhaustion demonstrates that
heat exhaustion can progress to heat stroke, a medical emergency, if
not treated promptly and that heat exhaustion may require time away
from work for a full recovery.
G. Heat Syncope
I. Introduction
Occupational heat exposure can result in heat syncope. Syncope is
the medical term for ``fainting,'' and heat syncope is defined as
``fainting, dizziness, or light-headedness after standing or suddenly
rising from a sitting/lying position'' due to heat exposure (NIOSH,
2023a). Heat syncope may sometimes be referred to as ``exercise-
associated collapse'' (EAC), but heat syncope can happen without
significant levels of exertion (Asplund et al., 2011; Pearson et al.,
2014). As explained below, heat syncope is an acknowledged and
documented health effect of occupational heat exposure.
II. Physiological Mechanisms
There are two mechanisms for how heat exposure can cause heat
syncope (Schlader et al., 2016; Jimenez et al., 1999). One mechanism
for heat syncope is reduced blood flow to the brain. Elevated core
temperature induces vasodilation, sweating, and may result in blood
pooling in certain areas of the body (see Section IV.B., General
Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health Effects). Thus, there is a lower
circulating blood volume, which can reduce blood flow to the brain and
cause loss of consciousness (Wilson et al., 2006; Van Lieshout et al.,
2003).
A second mechanism for heat syncope is reduced cerebral blood
velocity (CBV) (indicative of reduced blood flow to the brain) that
results in orthostatic intolerance (the inability to remain upright
without symptoms) during a heat stress episode (Wilson et al., 2006).
As individuals experience whole body heating, CBV is reduced and
cerebral vascular resistance (the ratio of carbon dioxide stimulus to
cerebral blood flow) increases. These changes ultimately contribute to
reduced cerebral perfusion and blood flow, as well as orthostatic
intolerance (Wilson et al., 2006). The orthostatic response to heat
stress during ``rest'' (i.e., standing/sitting) is essentially
equivalent to the orthostatic response to heat stress after exercise if
skin temperature is similarly elevated (Pearson et al., 2014). While
core temperature is not always elevated in cases of heat syncope, skin
temperature typically is (Department of the Army, 2022; Noakes et al.,
2008).
Differentiating between heat syncope, heat exhaustion, and heat
stroke is a critical step in proper diagnosis (Santelli et al., 2014;
Coris et al., 2004). As stated above, heat syncope always involves loss
of consciousness, but it does not require elevated core body
temperature (Santelli et al., 2014; Holtzhausen et al., 1994).
Conversely, heat exhaustion and stroke do not require loss of
consciousness. Though central nervous system (CNS) disturbances are
possible in heat stroke and heat stroke is always characterized by
significantly elevated core temperature. Further, recovery of mental
status is faster in heat syncope than in exhaustion and heat stroke,
since cooling may not be required for treatment of heat syncope (Howe
and Boden, 2007).
III. Occupational Heat Syncope
Workers have experienced heat syncope when exposed to heat. A
survey-based study in southern Georgia found that 4% of 405 farmworkers
experienced fainting within the previous week (Fleischer et al., 2013).
Another survey-based study in North Carolina asked 281 farmworkers if
they had ever experienced heat-related illness and found that 3% of
workers had fainted (Mirabelli et al., 2010). While these cases were
not formally diagnosed as heat syncope, Fleischer reported temperatures
ranging from 34-40 [deg]C (94-104 [deg]F) and a heat index of 37-42
[deg]C (100-108 [deg]F) at the time workers fainted, and Mirabelli
described the working conditions at the time of fainting as being in
``extreme heat.''
IV. Treatment and Recovery
NIOSH recommends treating heat syncope by having the worker sit
down in a cool environment and hydrate with either water, juice, or a
sports drink (NIOSH, 2016). The Department of the Army recommends that
``victims of heat/parade syncope will recover rapidly once they sit or
lay supine, though complete recovery of stable blood pressure and heart
rate (resolution of orthostasis or ability to stand without fainting)
in some individuals may take 1 to 2 hours'' (Department of the Army,
2022). Treatment recommendations for athletes consist of moving the
athlete to a cool area and laying them supine with elevated legs to
assist in venous return,
[[Page 70716]]
possibly with oral or intravenous rehydration (Peterkin et al., 2016;
Howe and Boden, 2007; Seto et al., 2005; Lugo-Amador et al., 2004).
An episode of heat syncope may require time away from work for a
thorough evaluation to ascertain one's risk for recurrent/future
episodes of heat syncope. No studies have evaluated recurring episodes
of syncope among workers specifically, but a study found that, for the
general population, 1-year syncope recurrence (any type) was 14% in
working-age people (18-65 years) (Barbic et al., 2019). The U.S. Army
has a requirement to ``obtain a complete history to rule out other
causes of syncope, including an exertional heat illness or other
medical diagnosis (for example, cardiac disorder)'' (Department of the
Army, 2022). Recommendations for athletes include thorough evaluation
``for injury resulting from a fall, and all cardiac, neurologic, or
other potentially serious causes for syncope'' (Howe and Boden, 2007;
Lugo-Amador et al., 2004; Binkley et al., 2002). Indeed, if an injury
(e.g., fall, collision) is sustained because of heat syncope, treatment
beyond first aid (including hospitalization) may be necessary.
Supporting this point, more general syncope has been linked to
occupational accidents requiring hospitalizations (Nume et al., 2017).
V. Summary
The scientific and medical literature presented in this section
demonstrate that heat syncope is a recognized health effect of
occupational heat exposure. Studies suggest that heat syncope may
require time away from work for further evaluation. Additionally, heat
syncope can lead to injuries (e.g., injury from a fall), some of which
may require hospitalization.
H. Rhabdomyolysis
I. Introduction
Rhabdomyolysis is a life-threatening illness that can affect
workers exposed to occupational heat. NIOSH defines rhabdomyolysis as
``a medical condition associated with heat stress and prolonged
physical exertion, resulting in the rapid breakdown of muscle and the
rupture and necrosis of the affected muscles'' (NIOSH, 2016). This
definition is specific to exertional rhabdomyolysis. Another form of
rhabdomyolysis, called traumatic rhabdomyolysis, is caused by direct
muscle trauma (e.g., from a fall or crush injury). Workers can
experience such injuries, and consequently suffer from traumatic
rhabdomyolysis, because of occupational heat exposure (see Section
IV.P., Heat-Related Injuries). However, this section will focus only on
exertional rhabdomyolysis. Unless otherwise specified, all references
to rhabdomyolysis are shorthand for exertional rhabdomyolysis.
Signs and symptoms of rhabdomyolysis include myalgia (muscle pain),
muscle weakness, muscle tenderness, muscle swelling, and/or dark-
colored urine (Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, 2023b; Dantas
et al., 2022; O'Connor et al., 2008; Cervellin et al., 2010). Notably,
the onset of these symptoms may be delayed by 24-72 hours (Kim et al.,
2016). Rhabdomyolysis commonly affects individuals who are exposed to
heat during physical exertion. For example, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) investigated an incident in which an
entire cohort of 50 police trainees were diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis
after the first 3 days of a 14-week training program; the trainees had
engaged in heavy physical exertion outdoors with limited access to
water. The CDC concluded that adequate hydration is particularly
important when the HI approaches 80 [deg]F (Goodman et al., 1990).
Rhabdomyolysis has long been recognized as a heat-related illness
by NIOSH, the U.S. Armed Forces, and national athletic organizations
such as the American College of Sports Medicine (Armstrong et al.,
2007). Specifically, NIOSH lists rhabdomyolysis as an ``acute heat
disorder'' in its Criteria for a Recommended Standard (2016) and
provides detailed recommendations for recognition and treatment of
rhabdomyolysis. NIOSH also conducted case studies and retrospective
analyses to identify cases of rhabdomyolysis among workers exposed to
heat, including firefighter cadets and instructors, as well as park
rangers (Eisenberg et al., 2019; Eisenberg J et al., 2015; Eisenberg
and Methner, 2014).
Similarly, the U.S. Armed Forces developed a case definition that
specifies rhabdomyolysis can be heat-related (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Board, 2017), and this definition is applied in their
annual surveillance reports of HRIs. From 2018 to 2022, most
rhabdomyolysis cases (75.9%) occurred during warmer months (i.e., May
to October) (Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, 2023b). In a
retrospective study of hospital admissions for rhabdomyolysis in
military members (2010-2013), 60.1% (193 out of 321) cases were deemed
to be associated with exertion and exposure to heat (Oh et al., 2022).
Many studies have also found that rhabdomyolysis often coincides
with exertional heat stroke and other HRIs such as heat exhaustion,
heat cramps, hyponatremia, and dehydration. The frequent co-occurrence
of rhabdomyolysis and other HRIs has been reported among workers,
including police and firefighters (Eisenberg et al., 2019; Goodman et
al., 1990), workers included in OSHA enforcement investigations (Tustin
et al., 2018a), military members (Oh et al., 2022; Carter et al.,
2005), athletes (Thompson et al., 2018), and in the general population
(Thongprayoon et al., 2020).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
Studies have identified two interrelated mechanisms through which
heat exposure, combined with exertion, can cause rhabdomyolysis. Both
mechanisms share a common origin: occupational heat exposure and
exertion both contribute to excessive heat stress, which in turn causes
an elevated core temperature. Both mechanisms also share a common
outcome: the breakdown and death of muscle tissue, which is the
hallmark characteristic of rhabdomyolysis. The first mechanism is
thermal injury to muscle cells. When the body's core temperature is
elevated, it creates a toxic environment that can directly injure or
kill muscle cells. The temperature at which this occurs, known as the
thermal maximum, is estimated to be about 107.6 [deg]F (42 [deg]C)
(Bynum et al., 1978). At the thermal maximum, the structural components
of the cells' membranes are liquified and the membrane breaks down.
Proteins in the cells' mitochondria, which are key to energy
production, change shape and no longer function properly. Calcium,
which is normally maintained at a low level inside muscle cells, will
rush into the cells and activate inflammatory processes that accelerate
the death of those cells (Torres et al., 2015; Khan, 2009).
The second mechanism is lack of oxygen to muscle cells. When the
body attempts to cool itself, it can lose high volumes of sweat. Sweat
loss can deplete the body's stores of water and electrolytes, leading
to low blood volume (see Section IV.B., General Mechanisms of Heat-
Related Health Effects). Low blood volume, and low potassium in the
blood (known as hypokalemia), can both contribute to muscle cell death.
An adequate supply of blood is necessary to deliver oxygen to muscles,
and an adequate supply of potassium is needed to support vasodilation
(to support increased blood flow to the muscles during exertion). When
neither blood volume nor
[[Page 70717]]
potassium are sufficient, the muscle cells do not receive enough oxygen
(known as ischemia). When this occurs, the muscle cells produce less
energy and eventually will die if exertion continues (Knochel and
Schlein, 1972).
III. Occupational Rhabdomyolysis
While OSHA is not aware of surveillance data on the incidence of
rhabdomyolysis in the worker population in the United States, there are
surveillance data on the incidence of rhabdomyolysis among active
military members in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. These
data have been reported for the U.S. Army from 2004 to 2006 (Hill et
al., 2012) and for all military branches from 2008 through 2022 (Armed
Forces Health Surveillance Division, 2023b; Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2018; U.S. Armed Forces, 2013). These
surveillance data and the studies described above by NIOSH and others
indicate that workers performing strenuous tasks in the heat are at
risk of developing rhabdomyolysis. The U.S. Armed Forces has
successfully identified many cases of heat-related rhabdomyolysis by
searching medical records for the presence of either the ICD-10 code
for rhabdomyolysis and/or the ICD-10 code for myoglobinuria, along with
any other heat-related codes (table IV-1) (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2023b; Oh et al., 2022).
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Rhabdomyolysis is a serious heat-related illness that can cause
life-threatening complications. Many cases of rhabdomyolysis may
require hospitalization. For example, A CDC investigation into a police
training program in Massachusetts found that 26% of police trainees (13
out of 50) were hospitalized for rhabdomyolysis only three days into
their training (Goodman et al., 1990). The mean length of
hospitalization was 6 days, with a range of 1 to 20 days (Goodman et
al., 1990). Similarly, a military surveillance study identified 473
rhabdomyolysis cases among military members in 2022, with 35.3% of
cases (167 out of 473) requiring hospitalization (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2023b). In a retrospective study of 193 military
trainees hospitalized for rhabdomyolysis, the mean length of
hospitalization was 2.6 days, with a range of 0 to 25 days (Oh et al.,
2022).
The focus of treatment for rhabdomyolysis during hospitalization is
to reduce levels of creatine kinase (CK) and myoglobin in the blood, as
well as correct electrolyte imbalances, through aggressive
administration of intravenous fluids (generally normal saline)
(O'Connor et al., 2020; Luetmer et al., 2020; Manspeaker et al., 2016;
Torres et al., 2015). Monitoring is used to repeatedly measure CK
levels until a peak concentration is reached (often within 1-3 days),
and then to ensure that CK levels are consistently trending downwards
before discharge from the hospital (Kodadek et al., 2022; Oh et al.,
2022).
Complications of rhabdomyolysis are also possible. When muscle
cells die, they release several electrolytes and proteins into the
bloodstream that can cause severe health complications. For example,
the release of potassium from muscle cells can cause hyperkalemia (high
level of potassium in the blood), which then leads to heart arrhythmias
(abnormal heart rhythms) (Mora et al., 2017; Sauret et al., 2002).
Also, the release of myoglobin into the bloodstream can be toxic for
the kidneys. When blood is filtered by nephrons (functional units of
the kidneys) to produce urine, the presence of even small amounts of
myoglobin can obstruct and damage the nephrons (Mora et al., 2017;
Sauret et al., 2002). In some cases, these complications from
rhabdomyolysis can be life-threatening (Wesdock and Donoghue, 2019) and
in fact fatalities have been reported (Gardner and Kark, 1994; Goodman
et al., 1990). A more detailed discussion of how rhabdomyolysis can
cause acute kidney injury or other kidney damage can be found in
Section IV.M., Kidney Health Effects.
Guidelines for return to work among workers diagnosed with
rhabdomyolysis are limited. In the U.S. military, soldiers deemed to be
at low risk for recurrence of rhabdomyolysis are restricted to light,
indoor duty and encouraged to rehydrate for at least 72 hours to allow
for normalization of CK levels. If CK levels do not normalize, they
must continue indoor, light duty; if CK levels do normalize, they can
proceed to light, outdoor duty for at least 1 week and must show no
return of clinical symptoms before they can gradually return to full
duty. In contrast, soldiers deemed to be at high risk for recurrence of
rhabdomyolysis must undergo additional diagnostic tests, with
consultation from experts, and can be given an individualized,
restricted exercise program while they await clearance for full return
to duty (O'Connor et al., 2020; O'Connor et al., 2008). These
guidelines have been adopted by the Armed Forces and restated in their
surveillance reports of rhabdomyolysis (Armed Forces Health
Surveillance Division, 2023b).
V. Summary
The available scientific literature indicates that rhabdomyolysis
can result from physical exertion in the heat. Based on plausible
mechanistic data, studies by NIOSH and others, and surveillance data
indicating incidence of rhabdomyolysis among active military members,
OSHA preliminarily determines that workers performing strenuous tasks
in the heat are at risk of rhabdomyolysis.
I. Hyponatremia
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may experience hyponatremia, a
condition that occurs when the level of sodium in the blood falls below
normal levels (<135 milliequivalents per liter (mEq/L)) (NIOSH, 2016).
Hyponatremia is often caused by drinking too much water or hypotonic
fluids, such as sports drinks, over a prolonged period of time. Without
sodium replacement, the high water intake can result in losses of
sodium in the blood as more sodium is lost due to increased sweating
from heat exposure and urination (Korey Stringer Institute (KSI),
n.d.). Mild forms of hyponatremia may not produce any signs or
symptoms, or may present with symptoms including muscle weakness and/or
twitching, dizziness, lightheadedness, headache, nausea and/or
vomiting, weight gain, and swelling of the hands or feet (KSI, n.d.;
NIOSH, 2016). In severe cases, hyponatremia may cause altered mental
status, seizures, cerebral edema, pulmonary edema, and coma, which may
be fatal (KSI, n.d.; NIOSH, 2016; Rosner and Kirven, 2007). NIOSH and
the U.S. Army classify hyponatremia as a heat-related illness (NIOSH,
2016; Department of the Army, 2022).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
When exposed to heat, the autonomic nervous system triggers the
body's sweat response, in which sweat glands release water to wet the
skin (Roddie et al., 1957; Grant and Holling, 1938). The purpose of the
sweat response is to cool the body. However, in doing so, it can
deplete the body's stores of water and electrolytes (e.g., sodium,
potassium, chloride, calcium, and magnesium) that are essential for
normal bodily function (Shirreffs and Maughan, 1997). As the body's
store of sodium is lessening and high quantities of water are consumed,
hyponatremia may develop as sodium in the blood becomes diluted (<135
mEq/L). In some cases, this dilution may cause an osmotic
disequilibrium--an imbalance in the amount of sodium inside and outside
the cell resulting in
[[Page 70718]]
cellular swelling--which can lead to the serious and fatal health
outcomes discussed above.
III. Occupational Hyponatremia
Surveillance of hyponatremia among workers is limited. However, a
recent case study demonstrates the potential severity and life-
threatening nature of hyponatremia. After a seven-day planned absence
from work, a 34-year-old male process control operator in an aluminum
smelter pot room was hospitalized due to a variety of HRI symptoms
including hyponatremia, with serum (the liquid portion of blood
collected without clotting factors) sodium level of 114 millimoles per
liter (mmol/L) (reference range: 136-145 mmol/L) (Wesdock and Donoghue,
2019). After 13 days in the hospital, the patient was discharged with a
diagnosis of ``severe hyponatremia likely triggered by heat exposure''
(Wesdock and Donoghue, 2019). The patient was still out of work 32
weeks after the incident. While no temperature data for the pot room
were available, an exposure assessment used outdoor temperatures that
day and pot room temperatures from the literature to estimate that the
WBGT could have been as high as 33 [deg]C, which the authors state
exceeds the ACGIH TLV for light work for acclimatized workers (Wesdock
and Donoghue, 2019).
The relationship of heat exposure and hyponatremia was examined
among male dockyard workers in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (Holmes et
al., 2011). This population performed long periods of manual work in
the heat and consumed a diet low in sodium. A first round of plasma
(i.e., the liquid part of blood collected that contains water,
nutrients and clotting factors) samples were taken at the end of the
summer (n=44), with a second round taken at the end of the winter among
volunteers still willing to participate (n=38). In the summer, 55% of
participants were found to be hyponatremic (<135 millimolar (mM)),
whereas only 8% were hyponatremic in the winter. Although ambient
temperature conditions were not reported, the authors indicate that
hyponatremia was highest during the summer because of sodium losses
through sweat and inadequate sodium replacement (Holmes et al., 2011).
Hyponatremia among the military population has been well documented
by the Annual Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, which releases
annual reports on exertional hyponatremia among active duty component
services members, each with surveillance data for the previous 15 years
(e.g., Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, 2023a; Armed Forces
Health Surveillance Division, 2022a; Armed Forces Health Surveillance
Division, 2021; Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, 2020). Cases
come from the Defense Medical Surveillance System and include both
ambulatory medical visits and hospitalizations in both military and
civilian facilities. During the period of 2004 through 2022, the number
of cases of hyponatremia among U.S. Armed Forces peaked in 2010 with
180 cases. The lowest number during that time period was 2013, when 72
cases were reported. During the last 15 years in which data were
reported (2007-2022), 1,690 cases of hyponatremia occurred. Of these
1,690 cases, 86.8% (1,467) were diagnosed and treated during an
ambulatory care visit (Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division,
2023a). As the diagnostic code for hyponatremia may include cases that
are not heat-related, these data may be overestimates. However, such
overestimation is reduced in this study as the authors controlled for
many other related diagnoses (e.g., kidney diseases, endocrine
disorders, alcohol/illicit drug abuse), which can cause hyponatremia.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment and recovery for hyponatremia can vary depending on
severity and symptoms. Workers presenting with mild symptoms should
increase salt intake by consuming salty foods or oral hypertonic saline
and restrict fluid until symptoms resolve or sodium levels return to
within normal limits (KSI, n.d.). Medical attention may be required in
severe cases, which may be life-threating, and may be sought to address
symptoms and personal risk factors (e.g., history of heart conditions,
on a low sodium diet) (NIOSH, 2016).
V. Summary
The available evidence in the scientific literature indicates that
hyponatremia can result from occupational heat exposure. The evidence
on treatment and recovery demonstrates that hyponatremia can require
medical attention and, in some cases, may be life-threatening.
J. Heat Cramps
I. Introduction
Workers exposed to environmental or radiant heat can experience
sudden muscle cramps known as ``heat cramps.'' NIOSH defines heat
cramps as ``a heat-related illness characterized by spastic
contractions of the voluntary muscles (mainly arms, hands, legs, and
feet), usually associated with restricted salt intake and profuse
sweating without significant body dehydration'' (NIOSH, 2016). Someone
can experience heat cramps even if they are frequently hydrating with
water, but they are not replenishing electrolytes. Heat cramps are
recognized as a ``heat-related illness'' by numerous organizations,
including NIOSH, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, National Athletic Trainers'
Association (NATA), American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), and
World Medicine (formerly known as IAAF).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
It is recognized in the medical and scientific communities that
heat cramps result from heat exposure. However, the exact physiological
mechanism is not known. In an early study of heat cramps, investigators
included the following as the diagnostic criteria for heat cramps:
exposure to high temperatures at work; painful muscle cramps; rapid
loss of salt in the sweat that is not replaced (which may cause
hyponatremia); diminished concentration of chloride in the blood and in
the body tissues (also known as hypochloremia); and rapid amelioration
of symptoms after appropriate treatment (Talbott and Michelsen, 1933).
The following mechanism has been proposed for the development of
heat cramps: profuse sweating can deplete electrolyte stores (e.g.,
sodium (Na), potassium (K), calcium (Ca)), which exacerbates muscle
fatigue and can cause heat cramps (Bergeron, 2003; Horswill et al.,
2009; Schallig et al., 2017; Derrick, 1934). The U.S. Army further
posits that ``intracellular calcium is increased via a reduction in the
sodium concentration gradient across the cell membrane. The increased
intracellular calcium accumulation then stimulates actin-myosin
interactions (that is, filaments propelling muscle filaments) causing
the muscle contractions'' (Department of the Army, 2022). Heat cramps
are sometimes referred to, more broadly, as exercise-associated muscle
cramps (EAMCs) (Bergeron et al., 2008). However, heat cramps are
distinct in that they only occur in hot conditions, which exacerbate
electrolyte depletion, and may or may not be associated with exercise.
III. Occupational Heat Cramps
Surveillance data and survey study data demonstrate that workers
exposed to environmental or radiant heat frequently experience heat
cramps in the United States. In a study of heat-related illness
hospitalizations and deaths for the U.S. Army from 1980-
[[Page 70719]]
2002, 8% of heat-related illness hospitalizations recorded were due to
heat cramps (Carter et al., 2005). Similarly, in studies of self-
reported heat-related illness, workers frequently cite heat cramps as a
common symptom of heat exposure. Specifically, in several studies of
self-reported heat-related symptoms among farmworkers in multiple
States, participants reported experiencing sudden muscle cramps in the
prior week in Georgia (33.7% of 405 respondents) (Fleischer et al.,
2013), North Carolina (35.7% of 158 respondents) (Kearney et al.,
2016), and Florida (30% of 198 respondents) (Mutic et al., 2018). In
another study of self-reported symptoms among 60 migrant farmworkers in
Georgia, heat-related muscle cramps were reported by 25% of
participants, the second most frequently reported HRI symptom (Smith et
al., 2021). In a study examining exertional heat illness and
corresponding wet bulb globe temperatures in football players at five
southeastern U.S. colleges from August to October 2003, the authors
found that the highest incidences of exertional heat illness (EHI)
occurred in August (88%, EHI rate= 8.95/1000 athlete-exposures (Aes))
and consisted of 70% heat cramps (6.13/1000 Aes) (Cooper et al., 2016).
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment for heat cramps includes electrolyte-containing fluid
replacement (also known as isotonic fluid replacement), stretching, and
massage (Gauer and Meyers, 2019; Peterkin et al., 2016). In some cases,
sodium replacement may be a treatment for heat cramps (Talbott and
Michelsen, 1933; Sandor, 1997; Jansen et al., 2002). In severe cases,
it is recommended that magnesium levels of the patient are obtained and
if necessary, magnesium replacement through IV therapy is provided
(O'Brien et al., 2012). The ACSM recommends rest, prolonged stretching
in targeted muscle groups, oral sodium chloride ingestion in fluids or
foods, or intravenous normal saline fluids in severe cases (ACSM,
2007). NIOSH recommends that medical attention is needed if the worker
has heart problems, is on a low sodium diet, or if cramps do not
subside within 1 hour (NIOSH, 2016). If treated early and effectively,
individuals may return to activity after heat cramps have subsided
(Bergeron, 2007; Savioli et al., 2022; Gauer and Meyers, 2019).
However, severe heat cramps may require an emergency department visit
or hospitalization (Harduar Morano and Waller, 2017; Carter et al.,
2005). While most cases of heat cramps do not require restricted work
status or time away from work, guidelines for military personnel
suggest some cases may require light workload the next day and limited
workload the following day, with observation of the affected patient
because some additional deficits may be delayed or subtle (O'Connor et
al., 2007). In addition, guidelines for military personnel advise that
strenuous exercise be avoided for several days in some cases of heat
cramps (O'Connor et al., 2007). Severe heat cramps may also elicit
soreness for several days which can lead to a longer recovery period
(Casa et al., 2015).
V. Summary
OSHA's review of the scientific and medical literature indicates
that heat cramps are a recognized health effect of occupational heat
exposure. Indeed, several studies of self-reported symptoms of HRI
among farmworkers in multiple States have indicated that heat cramps
are quite common. The best available evidence on treatment and recovery
indicates that heat cramps can, in some cases, require medical
attention and may require time away from work or an adjusted workload.
K. Heat Rash
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may experience heat rash. Heat rash is
defined by NIOSH as ``a skin irritation caused by excessive sweating
during hot, humid weather'' (NIOSH, 2022). NIOSH, the U.S. Army, and
the U.S. Navy classify heat rash as a heat-related illness (NIOSH,
2016; Department of the Army, 2022; Department of the Navy, 2023). Also
known as miliaria rubra or prickly heat, workers with heat rash develop
red clusters of pimples or small blisters, which can produce itchy or
prickly sensations that become more irritating as sweating persists in
the affected area. Heat rash can last for several days and tends to
form in areas where clothing is restrictive and rubs against the skin,
most commonly on the neck, upper chest, groin, under the breasts, and
in elbow creases (OSHA, 2011; NIOSH, 2022; OSHA, 2024a). If left
untreated, heat rash can become infected, and more severe cases can
lead to high fevers and heat exhaustion (Wenzel and Horn, 1998). In
some cases, heat rash can lead to hypohidrosis (i.e., the reduced
ability to sweat) in the affected area, even weeks after the heat rash
is no longer visible, which impairs thermoregulation and can cause
predisposition for heat stress (Sulzberger and Griffin, 1969; Pandolf
et al., 1980; DiBeneditto and Worobec, 1985). This can impair an
employee's ability to work and prevent resumption of normal work
activities in hot environments to allow for the area to heal, which in
some cases can take 3-4 weeks for heat intolerance to subside (Pandolf
et al., 1980).
II. Physiological Mechanisms
The development of heat rash has been studied for centuries
(Renbourn, 1958). While working in hot environments with a high
relative humidity, the body's ability to cool itself is greatly
reduced, as sweat is less likely to evaporate from the skin (Sulzberger
and Griffin, 1969; DiBeneditto and Worobec, 1985). Heat rash occurs
when sweat remains on the skin and causes a blockage of sweat (eccrine)
glands and ducts (Wenzel and Horn, 1998). Since the sweat ducts are
blocked, sweat secretions can leak and accumulate beneath the skin,
causing an inflammatory response and resulting in clusters of red bumps
or pimples (Dibeneditto and Worobec, 1985). If left untreated, heat
rash may become infected (Holzle and Kligman, 1978). Depending on the
level of blockage, this can manifest as various types of miliaria, with
miliaria rubra being the most common form of heat rash (Wenzel and
Horn, 1998).
III. Occupational Heat Rash
Surveillance of heat rash in worker populations is limited.
However, farmworkers have reported cases of skin rash or skin bumps
while working in summer months (Bethel and Harger, 2014; Kearney et
al., 2016; Luque et al., 2020). From these studies, the percentage of
participants surveyed or interviewed that report experiencing skin rash
or skin bumps in the previous week were 10% (n=100, Beth and Harger,
2014), 12.1% (n=158, Kearney et al., 2016) and 5% (n=101, Luque et al.,
2020). Although these studies do not purport a diagnosis, presentation
of skin rash or skin bumps while working in hot environments with
reported average high temperatures ranging to the mid-90s [deg]F
indicates respondents may have developed heat rash.
Similar findings with diagnosis of heat rash or related symptoms
have been recorded outside of the U.S. among workers in the following
professions: 17% of indoor electronics store employees in air-
conditioned (4%) and non-air-conditioned (13%) areas in Singapore
(n=52, Koh, 1995); 2% of underground miners at a site in Australia
(n=1,252, Donoghue and Sinclair, 2000); 34% of maize farmers in Nigeria
(n=396, Sadiq et al., 2019); 68% of sugarcane cutters and 23% of
[[Page 70720]]
sugarcane factory workers in Thailand (n=183, Boonruksa et al., 2020);
41% of sugarcane farmers in Thailand (n=200, Kiatkitroj et al., 2021);
17% of autorickshaw drivers (n=78), 23% of outdoor street vendors
(n=75), 16% of street sweepers (n=75) in India (n=228, Barthwal et al.,
2022); and 13% of underground and open pit miners across Australia
(n=515, Taggart et al., 2024). Although these studies illustrate the
prevalence of heat rash in various worker populations, OSHA notes that
differences in study methodologies and the populations studied mean
that the results of these studies are not necessarily directly
comparable to each other or to similar industries or worker populations
in the United States.
The type of clothing worn may also contribute to formation of heat
rash while working in higher temperatures. Heat rash was formally
diagnosed among U.S. military personnel wearing flame resistant army
combat uniforms in hot and arid environments (102.2 [deg]F to 122
[deg]F (39 [deg]C to 50 [deg]C), 5% to 25% relative humidity) (Carter
et al., 2011). In this case series, 18 patients with heat rash
presented with moderate to severe skin irritation, which was worsened
by reactions to chemical additives not removed from the laundering
process and increased heat retention from sweat-soaked clothing, as
well as the friction from the fabric and the occlusive effect of the
clothing, which allowed sweat to accumulate on the skin despite the
lower humidity (Carter et al., 2011). This study calls attention to the
effect of clothing on the development of heat rash and factors that may
influence its severity.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Although most cases of heat rash can be self-treated without
seeking medical attention, symptoms typically last for several days
(Wenzel and Horn, 1998). It is important that heat rash is kept dry and
cool to avoid possible infection. Workers experiencing heat rash should
move to a cooler and less humid work environment and avoid tight-
fitting clothing, when possible (NIOSH, 2022). The affected area should
be kept dry, and ointments and creams, especially if oil-based, should
not be used (NIOSH, 2022). However, powder may be used for relief.
V. Summary
The available evidence in the scientific literature indicates that
heat rash can result from occupational heat exposure. Although heat
rash usually resolves on its own without medical attention, symptoms
often persist for several days and more severe cases can impair an
employee's ability to work and lead to infection if left untreated.
L. Heat Edema
I. Introduction
Workers in hot environments may experience heat edema. Heat edema
is the swelling of soft tissues, typically in the lower extremities
(feet, ankles, and legs) and hands, and may be accompanied by facial
flushing (Gauer and Meyers, 2019). Surveillance systems and the U.S.
Army classify heat edema as a heat-related illness (Department of the
Army, 2022). Workers who are sitting or standing for prolonged periods
may be at higher risk for heat edema (Barrow and Clark, 1998). Workers
who are not fully acclimatized to the work site may be more prone to
developing heat edema as the body adjusts to hotter temperatures (Howe
and Boden, 2007).
II. Physiological Mechanism
When exposed to heat, the body increases blood flow and induces
vasodilation to cool itself and thermoregulate. This means, as blood is
shunted towards the skin and vasodilation begins, the blood vessels
near the skin's surface become wider (Hough and Ballantyne, 1899;
Kamijo et al., 2005). However, blood can pool in areas of the body that
are most subject to gravity (e.g., legs), and fluid can seep from blood
vessels causing noticeable swelling under the skin--this is known as
heat edema (Gauer and Meyers, 2019).
III. Occupational Heat Edema
Surveillance of heat edema is limited. Many studies include heat
edema as one of many HRIs that contributed to an aggregate measure of
HRI in worker, military, or general populations, but very few were
found to quantify heat edema alone.
Multiple studies outside of the U.S. have examined HRIs among farm
and factory workers in the sugarcane industry through surveys and
interviews (Crowe et al., 2015; Boonruksa et al., 2020; Kiatkitroj et
al., 2021; Debela et al., 2023). Respondents in the studies were asked
if they experienced swelling of the feet or hands (with varying degrees
of frequency) during periods of heat exposure, which could indicate
presentation of heat edema. In different samples of sugarcane workers
in two provinces of Thailand, two studies found incidence of swelling
of the hands and feet. Among sugarcane cutters, 16.7% self-reported
ever experiencing swelling of the hands or feet and 5.6% self-reported
experiencing these symptoms (mean 30.6 [deg]C WBGT) (n=90, Boonruksa et
al., 2020). In another province, 10.5% self-reported swelling of the
hands/feet while working one summer (n=200, Kiatkitroj et al., 2021).
While comparing HRI symptoms among sugarcane harvesters and non-
harvesters in Costa Rica, 15.1% of harvesters (n=106) and 7.9% of non-
harvesters (n=63) self-reported having ever experienced swelling of
hands/feet (p=0.173) (n=169, Crowe et al., 2015). While 7.5% of
harvesters, who worked outdoors in the field, self-reported
experiencing this symptom at least once per week, no non-harvesters
self-reported swelling with this level of frequency (p=0.026) (Crowe et
al., 2015). The sample of non-harvesters included both workers that
were intermediately exposed to heat (e.g., in the processing plant or
machinery shop) and workers not exposed to heat (e.g., in offices).
In a sample of sugarcane factory workers (n=1,524) in Ethiopia,
72.4% (1,104) were considered exposed to heat defined as conditions
exceeding the ACGIH's TLV (Debela et al., 2023). Of the total sample
(including workers considered exposed to heat and not), 78% (1,189)
self-reported having experienced swelling of hands and feet at least
once per week, which was the most commonly reported HRI symptom (Debela
et al., 2023). Although these studies do not purport a diagnosis,
presentation of swelling of the hands and feet while working in hot
environments suggests respondents may have developed heat edema.
IV. Treatment and Recovery
Although most cases of heat edema can be self-treated without
seeking medical attention, symptoms can last for days and reoccurrence
is less likely if individuals are properly acclimatized (Howe and
Boden, 2007; Department of the Army, 2023). It is important that the
affected individual moves out of the heat and elevates the swollen
area. Diuretics are not typically recommended for treatment (Howe and
Boden, 2007; Gauer and Meyers, 2019; CDC, 2024a).
V. Summary
The available evidence in the scientific literature indicates that
heat edema can result from occupational heat exposure, causing swelling
of the lower extremities (feet, ankles, and legs) and hands. It may be
difficult to move swollen body parts, thereby impeding an employee's
ability to perform their job. The need for medical attention can
typically be avoided if the condition is properly treated.
[[Page 70721]]
M. Kidney Health Effects
I. Introduction
The kidneys perform many functions in the body, including filtering
toxins out of the blood and balancing the body's water and electrolyte
levels (NIDDK, 2018). Working in the heat places a lot of demand on the
kidneys to conserve water and regulate electrolytes, like sodium, lost
through sweat. A growing body of experimental and observational
literature suggests that intense heat strain can cause damage to the
kidneys in the form of acute kidney injury (AKI), even independent of
conditions like heat stroke and rhabdomyolysis. An epidemic of chronic
kidney disease in Central America and other regions around the world
has placed additional attention on the potential of recurrent heat
stress-related AKI to cause chronic kidney disease (CKD) over time
(Johnson et al., 2019; Schlader et al., 2019). Working in the heat has
also been associated with the development of kidney stones among
workers outside the U.S., likely a result of decreased urine volume
leading to increased concentration of minerals in the urine that
crystallize into stones.
Each kidney is comprised of hundreds of thousands of functional
units called nephrons. Each nephron has multiple parts, including the
glomerulus (a cluster of blood vessels that conduct the initial
filtering of large molecules) and the tubules (tubes that reabsorb
needed water and minerals and secrete waste products). The fluid that
remains after traveling through the glomeruli and tubules becomes urine
and is eliminated from the body (NIDDK, 2018).
This section will discuss three kidney-related health effects
associated with heat exposure: kidney stones, AKI, and CKD.
II. Kidney Stones
A. Introduction
Kidney stones are hard objects that form in the kidney from the
accumulation of minerals. They range in size from a grain of sand to a
pea (NIDDK, 2017a). Symptoms include sharp pain in the back, side,
lower abdomen, or groin; pink, red, or brown blood in the urine; a
constant need to urinate; pain while urinating; inability to urinate or
only able to urinate a small amount; and cloudy or foul-smelling urine
(NIDDK, 2017b). Nausea, vomiting, fever, and chills are also possible,
and symptoms may be brief, prolonged, or come in waves (NIDDK, 2017b).
In rare cases or when medical care is delayed, kidney stones can lead
to complications including severe pain, urinary tract infections (UTI),
and loss of kidney function (NIDDK, 2017a). Risk factors for kidney
stones include being male, a family history of kidney stones, having
previously had kidney stones, not drinking enough liquids, other
medical conditions (e.g., chronic inflammation of the bowel, digestive
problems, hyperparathyroidism, recurrent UTIs), drinking sugary
beverages, and working in the heat, especially if unacclimatized
(NIDDK, 2017a; Maline and Goldfarb, 2024). NIOSH has also cautioned
workers that experiencing chronic dehydration can increase the risk of
developing kidney stones (NIOSH, 2017a).
B. Physiological Mechanisms
Kidney stones form when concentrations of minerals are high enough
to the point of forming crystals, which then aggregate into a stone in
either the renal tubular or interstitial fluid (Ratkalkar and Kleinman,
2011). Reduced urine volume, altered urine pH, diet, genetics, or many
other factors may cause this concentration of minerals (Ratkalker and
Kleinman, 2011). Heat exposure has the potential to cause kidney stones
through heat-induced sweating and dehydration. Loss of extracellular
fluid increases osmolality (i.e., increased concentration of solutes,
like sodium and glucose) which leads to increased secretion of
vasopressin, an antidiuretic hormone. Vasopressin signals to the
kidneys to conserve water by reducing urine volume, leading to
increased concentration of relatively insoluble salts, like calcium
oxalate, in the urine. These salts can eventually form crystals which
can develop into stones (Fakheri and Goldfarb, 2011).
C. Occupational Heat Exposure and Kidney Stones
Epidemiological studies conducted outside the U.S. have documented
the association between working in heat and developing kidney stones.
One of the earliest publications on occupational heat and kidney stones
was a small study of beach lifeguards in Israel (Better et al., 1980).
Eleven of 45 randomly selected lifeguards (24%) were found to have had
kidney stones, which Better et al. noted was approximately 20 times the
incidence rate of the general Israeli population at the time. The
authors attributed this finding to low urine output due to dehydration,
hyperuricemia (elevated levels of uric acid in the blood), and
absorptive hypercalciuria (elevated levels of calcium in the urine),
among other factors. In 1992, Pin et al. compared outdoor workers
exposed to hot environmental conditions to indoor workers exposed to
cooler conditions (Pin et al., 1992). This study of 406 men in Taiwan
included quarry, postal, and hospital engineering support workers. The
prevalence of kidney stones was found to be significantly higher in the
outdoor workers than the indoor workers (5.2% versus 0.85%, p<0.05).
The authors posited that chronic dehydration from working outdoors in a
tropical environment might explain the higher prevalence of kidney
stones among outdoor workers (Pin et al., 1992).
Several studies have also considered occupational exposure to
indoor heat sources. Borghi et al. studied machinists who had been
working in the blast furnaces of a glass plant in Parma, Italy for five
or more years, excluding those who had kidney stones before working at
the plant (Borghi et al., 1993). The prevalence of kidney stones was
significantly higher among machinists exposed to heat (n=236) than
among those working in cooler temperatures (n=165) (8.5% vs. 2.4%,
p=0.03) (Borghi et al., 1993). An analysis of risk factors revealed
that workers in the heat lost substantially more water to sweat and
that their urine had higher concentrations of uric acid, higher
specific gravity, and lower pH than workers in normal temperatures
(Borghi et al., 1993).
In a large study in Brazil, the prevalence of at least one episode
of kidney stones was 8.0% among the 1,289 workers in hot areas, which
was significantly higher than the 1.75% prevalence found among the
9,037 people working in room temperature conditions (p<0.001) (Atan et
al., 2005). An analysis of a subset of workers demonstrated that
workers in hot temperatures had significantly less citrate in their
urine (p=0.03) and lower urinary volume (p=0.01) compared to room-
temperature workers.
Venugopal et al. studied 340 steel workers in southern India
engaged in moderate to heavy labor with three or more years of heat
exposure (Venugopal et al., 2020). Of the 340 participants, 91 workers
without other risk factors for kidney disease, but who had reported a
symptom of kidney or urethral issues, underwent renal ultrasounds,
which revealed that 27% had kidney stones. 84% of the participants with
kidney stones were occupationally exposed to heat, as defined as
working in conditions above the ACGIH TLV. Having five or more years of
heat exposure was significantly associated with risk of kidney stones,
while
[[Page 70722]]
controlling for smoking (OR: 3.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 10.7).
Most recently, Lu et al. studied 1,681 steel workers in Taiwan, 12%
of whom had kidney stones, compared to the age-adjusted prevalence
among men in Taiwan of 9% (Lu et al., 2022). Heat exposure was found to
be positively associated with prevalence of stones, particularly among
workers <=35 years old (OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.2, 6.0) (Lu et al., 2022).
Overall, the peer-reviewed literature supports occupational heat
exposure as a risk factor for kidney stones, in both indoor and outdoor
environments, across multiple countries, and in several industries.
D. Treatment and Recovery
Treatment of kidney stones depends on their size, location, and
type. Someone with a small kidney stone may be able to pass it by
drinking plenty of water and taking pain medications as prescribed by a
doctor (NIDDK, 2017c). Larger kidney stones can block the urinary
tract, cause intense pain, and may require medical intervention such as
shock wave lithotripsy, cystoscopy, ureteroscopy, or percutaneous
nephrolithotomy to remove or break up the stone (NIDDK, 2017c).
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, whereby kidney stones are removed through
a surgical incision in the skin, requires several days of
hospitalization, but the other interventions typically do not require
an overnight hospital stay (NIDDK, 2017c). One study found that among
working aged adults, approximately one third of people treated for
kidney stones miss work and that they miss, on average, 19 hours of
work per person (Saigal et al., 2005). With monitoring or treatment,
people typically recover from kidney stones. However, over the long
term, individuals who develop kidney stones are at increased risk of
chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease, particularly if
kidney stones are recurrent (Uribarri, 2020).
E. Summary
The available peer-reviewed scientific literature demonstrates
occupational heat exposure as a risk factor for kidney stones, in both
indoor and outdoor environments. Kidney stones may require medical
treatment and in some cases hospitalization. Finally, individuals who
develop kidney stones are at increased risk of other kidney diseases.
III. Acute Kidney Injury
A. Introduction
Acute kidney injury (AKI) can affect workers exposed to
occupational heat. AKI is an abrupt decline in kidney function in a
short period (e.g., a few days). As normally functioning kidneys filter
blood and maintain fluid balance in the body, AKI events can disrupt
this fluid balance, which can impact major organs like the heart. AKI
can also have metabolic consequences, like a build-up of too much
potassium in the blood (hyperkalemia) (Goyal et al., 2023). AKI is not
always accompanied by symptoms and is typically diagnosed with blood
and/or urine tests (e.g., increase in serum creatinine). While damage
to the kidneys is one potential consequence of heat stroke (such as in
the context of multi-organ failure, as mentioned in Section IV.E., Heat
Stroke), this section is focused on AKI that is not necessarily
preceded by clinical heat stroke.
B. Physiological Mechanisms
There are three categories of AKI used to distinguish the location
of the cause(s) of AKI--prerenal, intrarenal, and postrenal (Goyal et
al., 2023). Prerenal AKI represents a reduction in blood volume being
delivered to the kidneys (i.e., renal hypoperfusion). This can be the
result of heat-induced sweating that leads to reduced circulating blood
volume. Prerenal AKI that is reversed (e.g., dehydration is quickly
reversed) is typically not associated with impairment to the kidney
glomeruli or tubules, however prolonged exposure can lead to direct
injury to renal cells through ischemia (inadequate blood and oxygen
supply to cells). Intrarenal AKI is when the function of the glomeruli,
tubules, or interstitium are affected, such as in the case of
nephrotoxic exposures (e.g., heavy metals) or prolonged ischemia.
Rhabdomyolysis, which was previously discussed in Section IV.H.,
Rhabdomyolysis, is one potential cause of necrosis of tubular cells
resulting from myoglobin precipitation and direct iron toxicity (Sauret
et al., 2002, Patel et al., 2009). Postrenal AKI is when there is an
obstruction to the flow of urine, such as kidney stones, pelvic masses,
or prostate enlargement. Postrenal AKI is less relevant to a discussion
of heat-related health effects, apart from kidney stones, which is
discussed in Section IV.M.II., Kidney Stones.
Researchers have written specifically about potential mechanisms
leading from occupational heat exposure to AKI (Roncal-Jim[eacute]nez
et al., 2015; Johnson et al., 2019; Schlader et al., 2019; Hansson et
al., 2020), often in the context of chronic kidney disease. As
previously discussed in Section IV.B., General Mechanisms of Heat-
Related Health Effects, working in the heat can lead to increases in
core temperature and reductions in circulating blood volume.
Researchers hypothesize that elevated core temperature could directly
injure renal tissue or that injury could be mediated through
subclinical (mild and asymptomatic) rhabdomyolysis or increases in
intestinal permeability that can cause inflammation. Reductions in
blood volume could inflame or injure the kidneys through reduced renal
blood flow that leads to ischemia and/or local reductions in adenosine
triphosphate (ATP) availability. Reduced blood flow and increased blood
osmolality also trigger physiologic pathways (e.g., renin-angiotensin-
aldosterone system, polyol-fructokinase pathway) which are energy-
intensive and may lead to oxidative stress and inflammation. Other
mechanistic pathways under investigation include urate crystal-induced
injury (Roncal-Jim[eacute]nez et al., 2015) and increased reabsorption
of nephrotoxicants (Johnson et al., 2019).
C. Identifying Cases of Acute Kidney Injury
Serum creatinine levels are used in clinical settings to estimate
kidney function (glomerular filtration rate, or GFR), as it is
typically produced in the body at a relatively stable rate and is
removed from circulation by the kidneys. Multiple criteria exist for
defining AKI based on increases in serum creatinine over hours or days,
such as the KDIGO criteria published by a non-profit organization that
produces recommendations on kidney disease (KDIGO, 2012). There are
multiple factors that could affect the reliability of using serum
creatinine to estimate GFR, including the increased production of
creatinine during exercise. As a result of the limitations of serum
creatinine, there is growing use of alternative biomarkers to identify
cases of AKI, which may be more reliable and specific to AKI, such as
neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, or NGAL.
D. Experimental Evidence
Researchers have documented an association between heat strain and
biomarkers of AKI in controlled experimental conditions. In 2013,
Junglee et al. documented elevations in urine and plasma NGAL and
reductions in urine flow rate in participants after a heat stress trial
that induced elevations in core temperature and reductions in body mass
(an indication of hydration status) (Junglee et al., 2013). These
increases in NGAL were higher in an experimental group that underwent a
muscle damaging, downhill (-10% gradient) run (compared to a non-
[[Page 70723]]
muscle damaging run on a 1% gradient) prior to the heat stress trial,
providing support for the argument that subclinical rhabdomyolysis may
be a pathway from heat stress to kidney injury. Schlader et al.
conducted a trial in which participants wearing firefighting gear
completed two separate exercise trials in hot conditions of different
durations. The longer duration trial was intended to induce higher
levels of heat strain, while the shorter duration was intended to
induce lower levels (Schlader et al., 2017). The researchers found that
the longer trial was associated with elevated core temperature and
reduced blood volume, as well as increases in serum creatinine and
plasma NGAL, suggesting the magnitude of kidney injury may be
proportional to the magnitude of heat strain. McDermott et al. tested
longer durations of exercise in the heat (5.7 1.2 hours)
and similarly found elevations in serum creatinine and serum NGAL from
before the trial to after (McDermott et al., 2018). To determine
whether it is elevated core temperature or reduced blood volume that
primarily drives heat-induced AKI, Chapman et al. conducted four trials
in which subjects exercised for two hours in the same conditions, but
received different interventions (water, cooling, water plus cooling,
and no intervention) (Chapman et al., 2020). The group with no
intervention had the highest levels of urinary AKI biomarkers in the
recovery period, whereas the water and cooling groups each experienced
reductions in AKI biomarker levels relative to the control group. The
researchers concluded that limiting hyperthermia and/or dehydration
reduces the risk of AKI.
The relationship between AKI and hyperthermia and/or dehydration
has also been demonstrated in animal models (Hope and Tyssebotn 1983;
Miyamoto 1994; Roncal-Jim[eacute]nez et al., 2014; Sato et al., 2019).
E. Cases of Occupational Heat-Related AKI
In addition to experimental evidence, heat-related AKI has also
been observed in ``real world'' conditions going back to the 1960s. In
1967, Schrier et al. documented evidence of military recruits
developing AKI (referred to as ``acute renal failure'') following
training exercises in the heat (Schrier et al., 1967). It was soon
after reported that AKI cases linked to exercise in the heat
represented a sizeable portion (approximately 10%) of all AKI cases
treated at Walter Reed General Hospital in the early 1960s (Schrier et
al., 1970).
More recently, serum creatinine-defined AKI has been observed in
agricultural workers in both Florida and California. Among a cohort of
field workers from the Central Valley of California, Moyce et al.
report a post-work shift incidence of AKI of 12.3% (35 of 283 workers)
(Moyce et al., 2017). Workers with heat strain, characterized by
increased core temperature and heart rate, were significantly more
likely to have AKI (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.74). Among a cohort of
agricultural workers in Florida, Mix et al. found that heat index
(based on nearest weather monitor) was positively associated with the
risk of AKI--47% increase in the odds of AKI for every 5 [deg]F
increase in heat index. The authors reported an incidence of AKI of 33%
(i.e., 33% of workers had AKI on at least one day of monitoring) in
this study (Mix et al., 2018).
OSHA researchers have also identified cases of heat-related AKI
among workers in the agency's own databases: the Severe Injury Reports
(SIR) database and case files from consultations by the Office of
Occupational Medicine and Nursing (OOMN) (Shi et al., 2022). Shi et al.
identified 22 cases of heat-related AKI between 2010 and 2020 in the
OOMN consultation records (based on serum creatine elevations meeting
the KDIGO requirements) after excluding cases related to severe
hyperthermia, multi-organ failure, or death. Using inclusion criteria
of a heat-related OIICS code (172*) and a mention of AKI in the
narrative, they also identified 57 cases of probable heat-related AKI
between 2015 and 2020 in the SIR database.
Studies conducted among workers outside the U.S. have also reported
a relationship between working in the heat and acute elevations in
serum creatinine or increased risk of AKI (Garc[iacute]a-Trabanino et
al., 2015; Wegman et al., 2018; Nerbass et al., 2019; Sorensen et al.,
2019).
There are a few limitations to these observational studies, such as
the use of serum creatinine to characterize AKI, as described above. An
additional limitation is the inability to determine from these studies
whether the AKI observed is due to prerenal or intrarenal causes. As
discussed in Physiological Mechanisms, prerenal AKI may be due to
reductions in renal blood flow (which would be expected in cases of
dehydration) and is not necessarily indicative of clinically
significant structural injury. Another limitation may be the use of
serum creatinine measures taken over relatively short spans of time,
which may be too short to see true reductions in GFR (Waikar and
Bonventre, 2009). However, there are a growing number of studies that
find a relationship between short-term fluctuations in serum creatinine
and longer-term declines in kidney function among outdoor workers (see
discussion in Section IV.M.IV., Chronic Kidney Disease).
F. Treatment and Recovery
There is a spectrum of severity for AKI. For example, some
individuals may not know they are experiencing AKI without a serum or
urine test. There is also a spectrum of time and medical treatment
needed for recovery, dependent on whether the AKI is quickly reversed
or sustained for longer periods of time. In Schlader et al. 2017,
researchers noted that the biomarkers of AKI for participants in their
trial returned to baseline the following day. However, intrarenal
causes of AKI may require longer periods of time for recovery and may
potentially require the need for medication or dialysis (Goyal et al.,
2023). AKI can be severe, which can be the case when resulting from
heat stroke, where it may represent irreversible damage to the kidneys
and can be fatal (Roberts et al., 2008; King et al., 2015; Wu et al.,
2021). Recurrent AKI may also lead to chronic kidney disease (as
discussed in Section IV.M.IV., Chronic Kidney Disease).
G. Summary
The available peer-reviewed scientific literature, both
experimental and observational studies, suggests that occupational heat
exposure causes AKI among workers. However, there are limitations in
the case definitions used to define AKI in observational settings.
IV. Chronic Kidney Disease
A. Introduction
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a progressive disease characterized
by a gradual decline in kidney function over months to years. It is
typically asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic until later stages of the
disease, when symptoms such as edema, weight loss, nausea, and vomiting
can occur (NIDDK 2017d). People with CKD can be at a greater risk for
other health conditions, like AKI, heart attacks, hypertension, and
stroke. The diagnosis typically requires multiple blood and urine tests
taken over time (NIDDK 2016). Typical risk factors for CKD include
hypertension and diabetes.
Epidemics of CKD in Central America and other pockets of the world,
such as India and Sri Lanka, that appear to be afflicting mostly young,
outdoor workers with no history of hypertension or diabetes have raised
questions about
[[Page 70724]]
whether working in hot conditions can cause the development of CKD
(Johnson et al., 2019). Researchers have been investigating this
question and the cause of the epidemic over the past 20 years,
including other potential exposures, such as heavy metals,
agrichemicals, silica, and infectious agents (Crowe et al., 2020).
B. Physiological Mechanisms
Researchers have proposed that working in the heat could lead to
the development of CKD through repetitive AKI events (see discussion of
heat-related mechanisms in Section IV.M.III., Acute Kidney Injury).
However, some researchers acknowledge the possibility that the
unexplained CKD cases observed in Central America and elsewhere may
instead represent a chronic disease process that begins earlier in life
which places workers at increased risk of AKI (Johnson et al., 2019;
Schlader et al., 2019). Additionally, as discussed above in Section
IV.M.III., Acute Kidney Injury, some occupational cases of AKI could be
transient, the result of prerenal causes, and possibly unrelated to the
development of CKD.
Independent of the epidemic of unexplained CKD, frequent and/or
severe AKI has been identified as a risk factor for developing CKD
(Ishani et al., 2009; Coca et al., 2012; Chawla et al., 2014; Hsu and
Hsu 2016; Heung et al., 2016). The relationship between heat-related
AKI and risk of developing CKD is untested in the experimental
literature because of the ethical implications (Schlader et al., 2019;
Hansson et al., 2020).
As discussed in Section IV.E., Heat Stroke, there is also evidence
that experiencing heat stroke may increase an individual's risk of
developing CKD (Wang et al., 2019; Tseng et al., 2020).
C. Identifying Cases of Chronic Kidney Disease
As discussed previously in the context of AKI, serum creatinine is
commonly used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR), the
indicator of kidney function. When measures of serum creatinine (and
therefore estimates of GFR) are taken over periods of months to years,
medical professionals can determine if an individual's kidney function
is declining. CKD is typically diagnosed when the estimated GFR is
below a rate of 60 mL/min/1.73m\2\ for at least 3 months, although
there are other indicators, like a high albumin-to-creatinine ratio.
There are various stages of CKD; the final stage is called end-stage
renal disease (ESRD) and represents a point at which the kidneys can no
longer function on their own and require dialysis or transplant.
D. Observational Evidence
There is a growing body of evidence that suggests that heat-exposed
workers who experience AKI (or short-term fluctuations in serum
creatinine) are at greater risk of experiencing declines in kidney
function over a period of months to years. For instance, sugarcane
workers in Nicaragua who experienced cross-shift increases (i.e.,
increase from pre-shift to post-shift) in serum creatinine at the
beginning of the harvest season were more likely to experience declines
in estimate GFR nine weeks later (Wesseling et al., 2016). Another
study conducted among Nicaraguan sugarcane workers found that
approximately one third of workers who experienced AKI during the
harvest season had newly decreased kidney function (greater than 30%
decline) and a measure of estimated GFR of less than 60 mL/min/1.73m2
one year later (Kupferman et al., 2018). In an analysis among
Guatemalan sugarcane workers, Dally et al. found that workers with
severe fluctuations in serum creatinine over a period of 6 workdays had
greater declines in estimated GFR (-20% on average) (Dally et al.,
2020). In a separate study conducted in Northwest Mexico, researchers
observed declines in estimated GFR among migrant and seasonal farm
workers from March to July that were not observed in a reference group
of office workers in the same region (L[oacute]pez-G[aacute]lvez et
al., 2021).
Further support for the hypothesis that working in the heat may
lead to declines in GFR and increased risk of CKD comes from
intervention studies in Central America, in which workers were given
water-rest-shade interventions and observed longitudinally for kidney
outcomes. In these studies, implementation of the heat stress controls
was associated with reductions in the declines in kidney function and
reduced rates of kidney injury (Glaser et al., 2020; Wegman et al.,
2018).
While much of the literature is focused on Central American
workers, OSHA did identify one paper conducted among a cohort of U.S.
firefighters. Pinkerton et al. (2022) found lower than expected rates
of ESRD in the cohort (relative to the general U.S. population) despite
high levels of occupational exposure to heat. However, as the authors
point out, this may be due to the healthy worker effect (i.e., a
phenomenon in occupational epidemiology by which workers appear to be
healthier than the general population due to individuals with health
conditions leaving the workforce) (Pinkerton et al., 2022). The authors
also examined associations between proxies for heat exposure and risk
of developing ESRD and found non-significant associations between the
number of exposed days and all-cause ESRD, systemic ESRD, and
hypertensive ESRD. Very few of the ESRD cases identified in this cohort
were due to interstitial nephritis (which would be most consistent with
the CKD cases observed in Central America), limiting the authors'
ability to examine associations between those cases and exposure.
There may be differences between the heat-exposed worker
populations in Central America and the U.S. that could limit the
ability to extrapolate findings from that region, such as differences
in other potentially nephrotoxic exposures (e.g., agrichemicals,
infectious agents). There is also evidence that children in regions
with epidemics of unexplained CKD have signs of kidney injury (Leibler
et al., 2021). Unfortunately, surveillance of CKD in the U.S. (namely
the U.S. Renal Data System) may be missing cases among susceptible
workers, such as migrant agricultural workers, limiting the ability to
detect a potential epidemic of heat-related CKD in this country.
In addition to the general lack of studies conducted among U.S.
workers, there may be other limitations with these observational
studies, such as limited data on longer-term follow-up (i.e., years
instead of months) and the potential for reverse causality (i.e.,
undetected CKD is causing AKI).
E. Treatment and Recovery
Often kidney disease gets worse over time and function continues to
decline as scarring occurs (NIDDK 2017d). As discussed above, late-
stage CKD (or ESRD) requires dialysis or a kidney transplant for an
individual to survive. Kidney failure is permanent. Having even early-
stage CKD may impair workers' urine concentrating ability, which could
increase their heat strain and risk of HRIs while working (Petropoulos
et al., 2023).
F. Summary
There is growing evidence suggesting that heat stress and
dehydration may be contributing to an epidemic of CKD among workers in
Central America and other parts of the world, although the cause is
still being investigated by researchers. There is currently limited
information as to whether this type of CKD is affecting U.S. workers
and if so, to what extent. Experiencing heat stroke has been identified
in the literature as a risk factor for developing CKD.
[[Page 70725]]
N. Other Health Effects
I. Introduction
In addition to the health effects discussed in the previous sub-
sections, heat exposures have also been linked to reproductive health
effects. Additionally, health effects have been associated with prior
episodes of heat illness.
II. Reproductive and Developmental Health Effects
There is mixed evidence that heat affects reproductive and
developmental health outcomes. NIOSH reported two mechanisms by which
heat may affect reproductive and developmental health: infertility
(e.g., such as through damaged sperm) and teratogenicity (harm to the
developing fetus, e.g., spontaneous abortion or birth defects) (NIOSH,
2016). NIOSH concluded that while human data about reproductive risks
at exposure limits (see NIOSH, 2016, table 5-1, p. 70) were limited,
results of research and animal experiments support the conclusion heat-
related infertility and teratogenicity are possible (NIOSH, 2016, p.
91).
More recent evidence, although also limited, continues to provide
support of a reproductive risk to people who are pregnant and
developmental risk to their children. Numerous epidemiological studies
have reported that heat exposure during pregnancy is associated with
poor outcomes, such as pre-term labor and birth and low-birth weight
babies (e.g., Kuehn and McCormick, 2017; Basu et al., 2018; Chersich et
al., 2020; Rekha et al., 2023). While most studies assess this
relationship in the general population of pregnant women and do not
specifically address occupational exposures, Rekha et al. show that
occupational exposures to heat were associated with adverse pregnancy
and fetal outcomes, as well as adverse outcomes during birth in a
cohort of pregnant women in Tamil Nadu, India (Rekha et al., 2023).
Although the mechanisms for these outcomes are unclear, a study of
pregnant women conducting agricultural work or similar activities for
their homes in The Gambia reported an association between heat exposure
and fetal strain (through measures of fetal heart rate and umbilical
artery resistance) (Bonell et al., 2022). Further, a recent
longitudinal prospective cohort study in Germany found that heat
exposure was associated with vascular changes in the uterine artery.
This study reports that changes of increased placental perfusion and
decreased peripheral resistance in the uterine artery indicate blood
redistribution to the fetus during the body's response to heat stress.
They also report increased maternal cardiovascular strain. This data
may support a mechanistic role for uterine and placental blood flow
changes during heat exposures in resultant birth outcomes, such as pre-
term birth (Yuzen et al., 2023; Bonell et al., 2022).
There is evidence that occupational heat exposures can affect male
reproductive health (e.g., Mieusset and Bujan, 1995). Some research
studies report associations between occupational heat exposure and time
to conceive (e.g., Rachootin and Olsen, 1983; Thonneau et al., 1997),
sperm velocity (Figa-Talamanca et al., 1992), and measures of semen
quality such as sperm abnormalities (Rachootin and Olsen, 1983; Bonde,
1992; Figa-Talamanca et al., 1992; De Fleurian et al., 2009). Effects
of heat on sperm have also been demonstrated in experiments in animal
models (Waites, 1991). Cao et al. report that in their study of heat
stress in mice, heat stress reduced sperm count and motility (Cao et
al., 2023). In this study, the heat exposed mice were exposed to
38[deg]C (100.4 [deg]F) temperatures for 2 hours per day for two weeks.
When the mice were not being exposed to heat, they were kept at
25[deg]C (77 [deg]F). Control mice were kept at 25[deg]C for the
duration of the study. Their study results indicate that reduced sperm
quality may be a result of disrupted testicular microbial environment
and disruption in retinol metabolism that occurs during heat stress.
Although, the authors note that the heat exposure does not accurately
mimic real world heat exposures in humans.
While it is accepted that heat impairs spermatogenesis, or
development of sperm (e.g., MacLeod and Hotchkiss, 1941; Mieusset et
al., 1987; Thonneau et al., 1997), some studies of occupational heat
exposure find no relationship between heat and semen quality (Eisenberg
ML et al., 2015). Another study found observable but not statistically
significant associations between heat and semen quality (Jurewicz et
al., 2014). Many studies of the effects of occupational heat exposure
on reproductive outcomes are cross-sectional in nature and measure
exposures through occupation categories or self-report answers on
questionnaires (e.g., Figa-Talamanca et al., 1992; Thonneau et al.,
1997; Jurewicz et al., 2014). These methods can be susceptible to
recall bias and misclassification errors, which can reduce accuracy in
characterizing the association between occupational heat exposures and
reproductive health outcomes, and they are also unable to determine
causality on their own. Additional research that quantifies
occupational heat exposures directly (e.g., through measures of heat
strain or on-site temperatures) would help to clarify the impacts of
occupational heat exposures on male reproductive outcomes.
III. Health Effects Associated With Prior Episodes of Heat Illness
A limited number of studies have focused on a variety of long-term
effects following a prior episode of heat illness. This includes
research by Wallace et al., also reviewed by NIOSH in the 2016 Criteria
for a Recommended Standard Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments, whose retrospective case control study of military
members found that those who experienced an exertional heat illness
event earlier in life were more likely to die due to cardiovascular or
ischemic heart disease (Wallace et al., 2007). Similarly, Wang et al.
reports that, in their retrospective cohort study in Taiwan, prior heat
stroke was associated with a higher incidence of acute ischemic stroke,
acute myocardial infarction, and an almost three-fold higher incidence
of chronic kidney disease compared to patients who had other forms of
heat illness or compared to the control group that had no prior heat
illness, over the study's 14 year follow-up period (Wang et al., 2019).
They also found significantly higher incidence of cardiovascular
events, cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease among
individuals in the study who had other forms of heat illness (heat
syncope, heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heat fatigue, heat edema and
other unspecified effects) compared to the control group that had no
prior heat illness. In a long-term follow-up study of military
personnel who had experienced exertional heat illness, Phinney et al.
reported a transient and small but observable increase in the rate of
subsequent hospitalizations and decreased retention in the military
(Phinney et al., 2001). While these studies suggest a relationship
between episodes of serious heat illness and subsequent health effects,
this body of research is small and subject to some limitations. The
cross-sectional nature of some of these studies does not allow for
determination of causality on their own. Additionally, given the
retrospective nature of some of these studies it is possible that
important confounding variables were not adjusted for in analyses,
including occupation in some cases.
[[Page 70726]]
IV. Summary
The description of evidence presented here demonstrates that there
is some evidence to support a link between occupational heat exposures
and adverse reproductive health outcomes. There is also limited
evidence that prior episodes of heat illness may affect health outcomes
later in life such as increased risk of cardiovascular disease and
kidney diseases. This evidence of reproductive and developmental health
effects and health effects associated with prior episodes of heat
illness, while suggestive, is still nascent and requires further
investigation.
O. Factors That Affect Risk for Heat-Related Health Effects
I. Introduction
This section discusses individual risk factors for heat-related
injury and illness. The purpose of this discussion is to summarize the
factors that may exacerbate the risk of workplace heat-related hazards
and to provide information to better inform workers and employers about
those hazards. However, exposure to workplace heat contributes to heat
stress for all workers and can be detrimental to workers' health and
safety regardless of individual risk factors. OSHA is not suggesting
that application of the proposed standard would depend on an employer's
knowledge or analysis of these factors for their individual workers.
Nor do these individual risk factors detract from the causal link
between occupational exposure to heat and adverse safety and health
outcomes or an employer's obligation to address that occupational risk
(see Reich v. Arcadian Corp., 110 F.3d 1192, 1198 (5th Cir. 1997)
(Congress intended the Act to protect all employees, ``regardless of
their individual susceptibilities''); Pepperidge Farm, Inc., 17 O.S.H.
Cas. (BNA) ] 1993 (O.S.H.R.C. Apr. 26, 1997) (that non-workplace
factors may render some workers more susceptible to causal factors does
not preclude finding the existence of an occupational hazard); see also
Bldg. & Const. Trades Dep't, AFL-CIO v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258, 1265
(D.C. Cir. 1988) (holding that OSHA did not err in including smokers in
its analysis of the significant risk posed by occupational exposure to
asbestos, despite the ``synergistic effects'' of smoking and
asbestos)). Many factors can influence an individual's risk of
developing heat-related health effects. These factors include variation
in genetics and physiology, demographic factors, certain co-occurring
health conditions or illnesses, acclimatization status, certain
medications and substances, and structural factors (e.g., economic,
environmental, political and institutional factors) that lead to
disproportionate exposures and outcomes. Although there is a lack of
evidence that explores the full extent to which these factors interact
to affect heat-related health effects, or how various risk factors
compare in their impacts, there is evidence that each of these factors
can affect risk of heat-related health effects. This section focuses on
factors that relate to an individual's health status. For an in-depth
discussion on acclimatization as a risk factor, see Section V., Risk
Assessment, and for an in-depth discussion on demographic factors and
structural factors that affect risk of heat-related illness, see
Section VIII.I., Distributional Analysis.
II. Risk Factors
There are a number of factors that can impact an individual's
response to heat stress and lead to variation in heat stress response
between individuals. These include variation in genotype (Heled et al.,
2004), gene expression (Murray et al., 2022), body mass and differences
in thermoregulation between the biological sexes (Notley et al., 2017),
differences in thermoregulation as people age (e.g., Pandolf 1997,
Kenny et al., 2010; Kenny et al., 2017), and pregnancy (Wells, 2002;
NIOSH, 2016). Normal variation across individuals in genetics,
physiology, and body mass results in variation in how individuals
respond to heat stress. There is some evidence that, at least in some
specific populations, variation in genotype (i.e., genetic makeup) can
affect heat storage and heat strain (Heled et al., 2004; Gardner et
al., 2020). Normal variation in body mass can also correspond to
variation in thermoregulation between individuals (e.g., Havenith et
al., 1998). Results from Havenith et al.'s experimental study of heat
stress under different climate and exercise types indicates that one
reason for this effect may be due to the relationship between size and
surface area of the skin which plays an important role in cooling
capacity (Havenith et al., 1998). A more detailed discussion of the
relationship between obesity and heat stress response can be found
below.
There is some evidence that biological sex could be considered a
risk factor for heat-related illness, although the evidence is mixed.
Some studies find differences in heat stress response between males and
females (e.g., Gagnon et al., 2008; Gagnon and Kenny, 2011; Gagnon and
Kenny, 2012). These differences may be due to differences in body mass
(Notley et al., 2017), lower sweat output in females or differences in
metabolic heat production (Gagnon et al., 2008; Gagnon and Kenny,
2012). However, recent experimental data assessing differences in
thermoeffector responses (autonomic responses that affect
thermoregulation, such as skin blood flow and sweat rate) between males
and females exposed to exercise show that differences between the sexes
in heat stress response are mostly explained by differences in
morphology (body shape and size and the resultant mass-surface ratios)
(Notley et al., 2017). Although, Notley et al.'s (2017) experiment only
involved heat environments where enough heat could be lost so that the
body does not continue to gain heat (compensable heat stress), so it is
unclear if an increased effect due to biological sex would occur in
conditions where heat gain is expected, such as in occupational
settings where environmental heat or environmental heat and exertion
exceed the body's ability to cool.
Healthy aging processes can also make individuals more susceptible
to heat-related illness. Aging may impact thermoregulation through
reduced cardiovascular capacity (Minson et al., 1998; Lucas et al.,
2015), reduced cutaneous vasodilation (the widening of blood vessels at
the skin to aid heat loss), sweat rate, altered sensory function
(Dufour and Candas, 2007; Wong and Hollowed, 2017), and changes in
fluid balance and thirst sensation (Pandolf, 1997). Observational
evidence tends to show that elderly individuals, particularly those
with co-existing chronic or acute diseases, are at highest risk for
morbidity or mortality related to heat exposures, and that risk
increases with age (e.g., Semenza et al., 1999; Fouillet et al., 2006;
Knowlton et al., 2008). However, experimental evidence shows that,
under certain conditions, when individuals are matched for fitness
level and body build and composition, middle-aged individuals can
compensate for heat exposures similarly to younger adults (Lind et al.,
1970; Pandolf, 1997, Kenny et al., 2017). Conversely, observational
studies of occupational populations often find that younger workers
experience greater rates of heat-related illness than do older workers
(e.g., Harduar Morano et al., 2015; Hesketh et al., 2020; Heinzerling
et al., 2020). While it is unclear why younger workers appear to have
greater rates of heat-related illness in epidemiological data,
Heinzerling et al. (2020) suggest that this could be a result of a
greater number of younger workers being
[[Page 70727]]
employed in high-risk occupations. Further, younger workers have less
work experience, meaning that younger workers are less familiar with
the heat risks associated with their jobs, how their body responds to
heat, and/or how to respond if they experience symptoms of heat-related
illness.
Health status is another factor that plays a role in how someone
responds to heat stress (e.g., Semenza et al., 1999; Knowlton et al.,
2008; NIOSH, 2016; Vaidyanathan et al., 2019, 2020). Conditions such as
cardiovascular disease and diabetes can affect risk of heat-related
illness (e.g., Kenny et al., 2016; Kenny et al., 2018). The
cardiovascular system plays an integral role in thermoregulation and
heat stress response (Costrini et al., 1979; Lucas et al., 2015; Wong
and Hollowed, 2017; Kenny et al., 2018). Cardiovascular diseases can
affect the heart and blood vessels, increasing cardiovascular strain
and decreasing cardiovascular function and thermoregulatory capacity
(Kenny et al., 2010) and, as a result, increase risk of heat-related
illness during heat stress (Kenny et al., 2010; Semenza et al., 1999).
For example, people with hypertension (i.e., high blood pressure) may
be at increased risk of heat-related illness due to changes in skin
blood flow that can impair heat dissipation during heat stress (Kenny
et al., 2010). Further, many individuals with hypertension and
cardiovascular diseases may take prescription medications that reduce
thermoregulatory functions, through mechanisms like reduced blood flow
to the skin, which can increase sensitivity to heat (Wee et al., 2023).
Studies estimate that a substantial percentage of the population, and
therefore the population of workers, have the type of health status
(i.e., having a chronic condition such as cardiovascular diseases)
(Boersma et al., 2020; Watson et al., 2022) that could affect their
response to heat stress. For example, Watson et al. (2022) estimate
that of the 46,781 surveyed adults between the ages of 18 and 34 who
reported being employed, 26.1% have obesity, 11% have high blood
pressure, and 9.7% have high cholesterol. Additionally, 19.4% were
estimated to have depression, which is sometimes treated with
medications that can affect thermoregulation.
Diabetes and obesity are other factors that may affect risk of
developing heat-related illness (Kenny et al., 2016). Both diabetes and
obesity may affect thermoregulation by reducing a person's ability to
dissipate heat through changes in skin blood flow and sweat response
(Kenny et al., 2016). While some evidence shows that individuals with
well-controlled diabetes may be able to maintain normal
thermoregulatory capacity (Kenny et al., 2016), some evidence indicates
that individuals with poorly controlled diabetes (Kenny et al., 2016)
or older individuals with Type 2 diabetes (Notley et al., 2021) may
experience decreased heat tolerance. Obesity has also been identified
as a risk factor for exertional heat illness in the military (e.g.,
Bedno et al., 2014; Nelson et al., 2018b; Alele et al., 2020). Gardner
et al. (1996) reported increasing risk of exertional heat illness among
male Marine Corps recruits as BMI increased. Additionally, a smaller
body mass to surface area ratio can reduce capacity for heat loss since
surface area is relatively smaller in relationship to mass (Bar-Or et
al., 1969; Kenny et al., 2016). Differences in tissue properties
between adipose (fat) tissue and other body tissues may indicate that a
higher body fat mass can lead to greater rises in core temperature for
a given amount of heat storage in the body (Kenny et al., 2016).
Beyond chronic health conditions, prior episodes of significant
heat-related illness and recent or concurrent acute illness or
infection may also affect an individual's response to heat stress and
increase the risk of heat-related illness (e.g., Carter et al., 2007;
Nelson et al., 2018a; Nelson et al., 2018b; Alele et al., 2020).
Reviews of research and case studies of heat-related illness indicate
that acute illnesses that may affect risk of heat-related illness
include upper respiratory infections and gastrointestinal infections
(Casa et al., 2012; Alele et al., 2020). However, statistical evidence
is limited (Alele et al., 2020). Leon and Kenefick (2012) discuss
results from a study of four marine recruits who presented with
exertional heat illness and who also had an acute illness separate from
heat-related illness. The recruits' blood tests showed elevated levels
of immune-related substances which Leon and Kenefick identify as being
substances that are both mediators of viral infection symptoms and
substances associated with exertional heat illness. Leon and Kenefick
interpret this observation, along with evidence from a study on rats
that showed that bacteria exposure exacerbated inflammation and organ
dysfunction due to heat stress, to suggest that pre-existing
inflammatory states, such as those that occur with acute viral illness,
compromise the ability to thermoregulate appropriately (Carter et al.,
2007; Leon and Kenefick, 2012) (see also Bouchama and Knochel, 2002).
Several studies in military populations also show that a prior heat
illness may increase risk of a future episode of heat illness (Nelson
et al., 2018b; Alele et al., 2020). Assessments of heat and epigenetics
(the study of how the environment and behavior affects genes) suggest
that the complex physiological responses to heat impact genetic
mechanisms that could play a role in increasing susceptibility to
future heat illness following an episode of heat illness (Sonna et al.,
2004; Murray et al., 2022).
Certain medications can also affect thermoregulation and risk of
heat-related illness. Medications that may decrease thermoregulatory
capability include medications that treat cardiovascular diseases,
diabetes, neuropsychiatric diseases, neurological diseases, and cancer
(Wee et al., 2023). Some of these medications affect thermoregulation
by directly affecting the region of the brain that controls
thermoregulation or through other central nervous system effects (e.g.,
antipsychotics, dopaminergics, opioids, amphetamines) (Cuddy, 2004;
Stollberger et al., 2009; Musselman and Saely, 2013; Gessel and Lin,
2020; Wee et al., 2023). Other medications affect thermoregulation
through effects on heat dissipation that occur due to changes in sweat
response and/or blood flow to the skin (e.g., anticholinergics,
antihypertensives, antiplatelets, some antidepressants and
antihistamines, aspirin) (see, e.g., Freund et al., 1987; Cuddy, 2004;
Stollberger et al., 2009; Wee et al., 2023; CDC, 2024b). There are also
medications that may affect ability to perceive heat and exertion
(e.g., dopaminergics) (Wee et al., 2023). Some medications can affect
electrolyte balances (e.g., diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium channel
blockers, and antacids) (CDC, 2024b). When accompanied by dehydration,
some medications also pose a toxicity risk (e.g., apixaban, lithium,
carbamazepine) (CDC, 2024b). Finally, some medications can affect fluid
volume, kidney function, hydration status, thirst perception, or
cardiac output (e.g., diuretics, ACE inhibitors, some anti-diabetics,
beta-blockers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), tricyclic
antidepressants, laxatives, and antihistamines) (Stollberger et al.,
2009; Wee et al., 2023; CDC, 2024b). The NIOSH Criteria for a
Recommended Standard for Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments (table 4-2), the Department of the Army's Technical
Bulletin 507 (table 4-2), and CDC's Heat and Medications--Guidance for
Clinicians contain additional information about classes of
[[Page 70728]]
medications and the proposed mechanisms for how they affect
thermoregulation (NIOSH, 2016; Department of the Army, 2022; CDC,
2024b).
Medications that can affect how individuals respond to heat are
used by a significant portion of the U.S. population. Survey data from
the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015-2016
showed that 60% of adults aged 40-79 used a prescription medication
within the last thirty days and approximately 22% of adults in that
same age range took five or more prescription medications (Hales et
al., 2019). Many of the medications reported by survey respondents are
medications that can affect an individual's response to heat (e.g.,
commonly used blood pressure and diabetes medications).
Amphetamines (whether prescription or illicit), methamphetamines,
and cocaine can also affect thermoregulation and increase risk of heat-
related illness (NIOSH, 2016; Department of the Army, 2022). These
substances can affect the central nervous system's thermoregulatory
functions, stimulate heat generation, and reduce heat dissipation
through vasoconstriction (Cuddy, 2004). The synergy between the
hyperthermia induced by these substances, physical activity, and heat
exposure can increase risk of heat-related illness (Kiyatkin and
Sharma, 2009). Analyses of occupational heat-related fatalities find
amphetamines and methamphetamines to be an important risk factor
(Tustin et al., 2018a, Karasick et al., 2020; Lin et al., 2023). In Lin
et al.'s 2023 review of heat-related hospitalizations and fatalities
documented through NIOSH Fatalities in Oil and Gas Database (2014-2019)
and OSHA's Severe Injury Report Database (2015-2021), 50% of identified
fatalities occurred in workers that had tested positive for
amphetamines or methamphetamines after they died. However, small sample
sizes, sampling strategies, and incomplete data have so far limited the
ability of studies to fully characterize the association between these
substances and risk of heat-related illness or fatality. Poor data
quality or limited data has also limited current studies from
concluding if and when amphetamine-like substances are from
prescription or non-prescription use.
Alcohol and caffeine use may also affect risk of heat-related
illness through effects on hydration status and heat tolerance (NIOSH,
2016; Tustin, 2018; Department of the Army, 2022). There have been
cases of fatalities due to occupational heat exposure in individuals
with a history of ``alcohol abuse or high-risk drinking'' (Tustin et
al., 2018a, p. e385). Both alcohol and caffeine may affect how someone
responds to heat stress due to their ability to cause loss of fluids
and subsequently dehydration, and alcohol also affects central nervous
system function (NIOSH, 2016). In the case of caffeine, it appears that
moderate consumption associated with normally caffeinated beverages
(e.g., one cup of coffee, tea, soda) may not interfere with
thermoregulation in a way that negatively affects response to heat
stress (NIOSH, 2016; Kazman et al., 2020; Department of the Army,
2022). However, heavily caffeinated beverages, such as energy drinks,
have been linked to negative health outcomes (Costantino et al., 2023)
and could potentially exacerbate heat stress through diuretic (salt and
water loss) mechanisms and cardiovascular strain (NIOSH, 2016).
Overall, there is a lack of robust data that quantify the specific
amounts of alcohol or caffeine that are problematic for heat stress
response. However, experts generally advise against drinking alcohol or
caffeinated beverages before or during work or exercise in the heat
(NIOSH, 2016; Department of the Army, 2022; CDC, 2022).
III. Summary
The evidence presented in this section demonstrates that there are
numerous factors that can affect risk of heat-related illness (e.g.,
genetics, age, body mass, some chronic conditions, prescription
medications and drugs). Because prevalence data show that a majority of
working-age adults live with or experience at least one risk factor,
these factors should be considered an important component of
understanding how individuals can be at increased risk for heat-related
illness. OSHA acknowledges, however, that for most of the described
risk factors, the evidence is not robust enough to determine the full
picture of how the factor impacts risk of heat-related illness or to
establish the degree to which the risk factor contributes to overall
risk of developing heat-related illness. There is also a lack of
evidence evaluating the way in which multiple risk factors combine to
affect risk of heat-related health outcomes.
P. Heat-Related Injuries
I. Introduction
In addition to heat-related illnesses, heat exposure can lead to a
range of occupational heat-related injuries. A heat-related injury
means an injury, such as a fall or cut, that is linked to heat
exposure. A heat-related injury may occur as a result of a heat-related
illness, such as a fracture following heat syncope. The association
between heat exposure and heat-related injury among workers has been
well documented over the last decade (Tawatsupa et al., 2013; Xiang et
al., 2014b; Adam-Poupart et al., 2015; Spector et al., 2016; McInnes et
al., 2017; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender, 2021; Dally et al., 2020;
Park et al., 2021; Negrusa et al., 2024). In particular, analyses of
workers' compensation claim data has demonstrated the increased risk of
occupational traumatic injury with increasing heat exposure (Xiang et
al., 2014b; Adam-Poupart et al., 2015; Spector et al., 2016; McInnes et
al., 2017; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender, 2021; Park et al., 2021;
Negrusa et al., 2024). These types of heat-related injuries can cause
hospitalizations, extended time out of work, and reduced productivity.
In some instances, a heat-related injury may be fatal, like in the
event of accidents such as a slip, trip, or fall. In 1972, NIOSH
identified occupational heat exposure as contributing to workplace
injuries, and discussed how accidents and injuries were outcomes that
could be prevented by a heat stress standard (NIOSH, 1972).
Specifically, NIOSH highlighted how reduced physical and psychological
performance, fatigue, accuracy of response, psychomotor performance,
sweaty palms, and impaired vision may result in a workplace heat-
related injury.
Since multiple types of injuries can be heat-related (e.g., strain,
fracture, crushing) and the mechanisms underlying those injuries vary
(e.g., impaired speed and reaction time, impaired vision, impaired
dexterity), the identification and classification of heat-related
injuries varies on a case-by-case basis. Although there are no ICD or
OIICS codes specific to diagnosing heat-related injuries, medical
professionals and occupational health professionals can combine a heat-
related illness code with other injury related codes to indicate an
injury is heat-related. An injury specifically attributed to heat would
be expected to be assigned both a heat-related OIICS or ICD code and an
injury OIICS or ICD code. Numerous researchers have used ICD and OIICS
code to conduct studies on heat-related injuries (Dillender, 2021;
Garzon-Villalba et al., 2016; Morabito et al., 2006; Spector et al.,
2016).
This section first presents the epidemiological evidence of
increasing occupational injuries during periods of hotter temperatures,
followed by a discussion of mechanisms that can lead to heat-related
injuries.
[[Page 70729]]
II. Occupational Heat-Related Injuries
A multitude of studies have identified an association between heat
exposure and occupational injury in the U.S. (Knapik et al., 2002;
Fogleman et al., 2005; Garzon-Villalba et al., 2016; Spector et al.,
2016; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender, 2021; Park et al., 2021; Negrusa
et al., 2024). These analyses primarily rely on workers' compensation
claim data and meteorological data and are often case-crossover or
observational time-series in design.
In two studies of outdoor agricultural workers (Spector et al.,
2016) and outdoor construction workers (Calkins et al., 2019) in
Washington State, traumatic injury claims were significantly associated
with heat exposure. Among outdoor agricultural workers (n=12,213
claims), Spector et al. (2016) found a statistically significant
increased risk of traumatic injuries at a daily maximum humidex (the
apparent, or ``feels like,'' temperature calculated from air
temperature and dew point, similar to heat index) above 25 [deg]C (77
[deg]F). Among outdoor construction workers (n=63,720 claims), Calkins
et al. (2019) found an almost linear statistically significant
association between traumatic injury risk and humidex. Both studies
reported that injuries most commonly resulted from falls or bodily
reaction and exertion, which may include sudden occurrences of strains,
sprains, fractures, or loss of balance, among others (Spector et al.,
2016; Calkins et al., 2019).
Using workers' compensation claim data from Texas, Dillender (2021)
found that hotter temperatures resulted in larger percent increases in
traumatic injuries among two similar sets of injury types, ``open
wounds, crushing injuries, and factures'' and ``sprains, strains,
bruises, and muscle issues.'' Park et al. (2021) examined over 11
million workers' compensation records in California and estimated that
approximately 20,000 additional injuries per year between 2001 and 2018
were related to hotter temperatures. In comparison to a day with
temperatures in the 60s [deg]F, the risk of occupational heat-related
injury increased by 5-7% (p<0.05) and 10-15% (p<0.05) on days with high
temperatures between 85-90 [deg]F and above 100 [deg]F, respectively
(Park et al., 2021).
In these case-crossover studies, cases serve as their own controls,
allowing for variables such as age, sex, race, and ethnicity, as well
as other known and unknown time-invariant confounders to be controlled.
However, there are still some limitations to these studies, such as the
potential for time-varying confounders (e.g., air pollutants like ozone
and sleep duration influenced by nighttime temperatures).
Studies conducted among workers outside the U.S. have also reported
a relationship between working in the heat and increased risk of
injuries (Morabito et al., 2006; Tawatsupa et al., 2013; Adam-Poupart
et al., 2015; McInnes et al., 2017; Martinez-Solanas et al., 2018).
Analyses from Dally et al. (2020), found an increase in injury risk
with increasing average daily mean WBGT above 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F)
among sugarcane harvesters in Guatemala; although this result was not
statistically significant, this may have been due to small sample and
event size.
III. Mechanisms
Heat exposure can impair workers' psychomotor and mental
performance, which can interfere with routine occupational tasks.
Consequently, the risk of work-related injuries, including slips,
trips, and falls, as well as cuts and other traumatic injuries, is
exacerbated when job tasks are performed in hot environments. As
summarized in the prior health effects sections of this preamble, heat
can impair a variety of physiological systems and produce a range of
symptoms. Changes in the cardiorespiratory, locomotor, and nervous
systems due to heat exposure can induce various bodily responses such
as fatigue, which may lead to injury (Ross et al., 2016). Changes from
elevated skin and core body temperatures, which may result in increased
sweating and dehydration, can cause decrements in physical, visuomotor,
psychomotor, and cognitive performance (Grandjean and Grandjean, 2007;
Lieberman, 2007). Even experiencing a high level of heat sensation may
contribute to discomfort and distress, causing distraction and other
behavioral changes that can result in accidents and injuries (Simmons
et al., 2008). An explanation of how heat exposure can impair
psychomotor and mental performance, and consequently lead to
occupational heat-related injuries is provided below.
A. Impaired Psychomotor Performance
Heat exposure can impair psychomotor function (i.e., the connection
between mental and muscle functions) which may cause heat-related
injuries. Impaired psychomotor function from heat exposure can take
multiple forms, including impaired movement, strength, or coordination
(fatigue); impaired postural stability and balance; and impaired
accuracy, speed, and reaction time. Each of these impairments to
psychomotor performance are discussed in turn below.
I. Impaired Movement, Strength, or Coordination (Fatigue)
Heat exposure can hamper psychomotor performance by impairing
workers' movement, strength, or coordination and causing fatigue.
Fatigue has been described as having a lack of energy or a feeling of
weariness or tiredness (NIOSH, 2023b). Effects from heat strain on the
cardiorespiratory and locomotor systems can cause both central and
peripheral fatigue due to increased heat storage at the brain and
muscle levels, along with other physiological mechanisms (Ross et al.,
2016). As an individual's metabolic rate increases in hot environments,
blood pH level may become more acidic and cause muscle fatigue from
increased muscle glycogen degradation, lactate accumulation, and
elevated carbohydrate metabolism (Varghese et al., 2018). These changes
have been shown to compromise performance.
Numerous studies demonstrate the relationship between heat exposure
and fatigue. In a cross-sectional survey of 256 occupational health and
safety professionals in Australia, fatigue was the most reported
incident in workers during higher temperatures (Varghese et al., 2020).
Among two groups of 55 steel plant workers who completed a
questionnaire assessing fatigue, the group of workers exposed to hotter
environments (30-33.2 [deg]C (80-91.76 [deg]F) WBGT) were significantly
more likely to report symptoms of fatigue in comparison to workers in
cooler environments (25.4-28.7 [deg]C (77.7-83.6 [deg]F) WBGT) (Chen et
al., 2003). This study highlights how fatigue symptoms increase with
rising heat exposure levels (Chen et al., 2003).
Moreover, in a review of 55 studies on workplace heat exposure,
core temperature elevation and dehydration have been shown to have
numerous negative behavioral effects including fatigue, lethargy, and
impaired coordination, which may lead to injury (Xiang et al., 2014a).
These 55 articles included ecological (22%), cross-sectional (64%), and
cohort (5%) studies, as well as epidemiological experiments (9%). From
one study included in the review, 42% of construction workers surveyed
reported it was ``easy to get fatigued'' while working in the summer
(Inaba and Mirbod, 2007). In another review of heat stress risks in the
construction industry, Rowlinson et al. (2014) also discussed the
association of high temperatures and
[[Page 70730]]
level of fatigue, which has been considered one of the critical factors
leading to construction accidents (Garrett and Teizer, 2009; Chan,
2011). In a case study of 15 workers who experienced fatigue-related
accidents, fatigue was shown to trigger other safety risks, such as not
following proper safety procedures or becoming distracted, which can
induce injury (Chan, 2011).
II. Impaired Postural Stability and Balance
Heat exposure has also been shown to impair postural stability and
balance as increases in metabolic heat can impact workers' gross motor
capacity (i.e., the ability to move the body with appropriate
sequencing and timing to perform bodily movements with refined
control), including postural balance. As individuals become dehydrated,
they may experience negative neuromuscular effects. Distefano et al.
(2013) demonstrated the detrimental impact of dehydration during task
performance in hot conditions, where subjects experienced decreased
neuromuscular control as characterized by poorer postural stability.
The authors found that neuromuscular control was impaired while
participants were hypohydrated (defined as uncompensated loss of body
water) and hyperthermic. Additionally, when an individual is
experiencing high-intensity exertion in hot environments and is already
dehydrated, this can result in further dilution of blood sodium. When
blood sodium is diluted, water may be forced from the extracellular
compartment into the intracellular compartment, which could lead to
pulmonary congestion, brain swelling, and heat stroke (Distefano et
al., 2013). At this stage, neurons begin degenerating in the cerebellum
and cerebral cortex, and this process coupled with the rise in body
temperature, impairs central nervous system functionality (Sawka et
al., 2011; Nybo, 2007; Distefano et al., 2013).
Research also indicates that performing exertional activities in a
hot environment may impair balance. To better understand lower
extremity biomechanics, Distefano et al. (2013) used an assessment tool
to measure gross movement errors, such as medial knee displacement, hip
or knee rotation, and limited sagittal plane (front to back) motion.
The authors found that after performing the exercise protocol,
participants demonstrated poorer movement technique when they were
hypohydrated in a hot environment compared with when they were
hypohydrated in a temperate environment or in a hot environment but
euhydrated (state of optimal total body water content) (Distefano et
al., 2013). These findings suggest that working in hot temperatures
while dehydrated may increase risk for injury due to impaired balance
(Distefano et al., 2013).
III. Impaired Performance in Accuracy, Speed, and Reaction Time
The compromising effects of heat strain on psychomotor function
have long been established, but the level of performance deterioration
is dependent on the severity of heat strain and the complexity of the
task (Taylor et al., 2016; Hancock, 1986; Ramsey, 1995; Pilcher et al.,
2002; Hancock and Vasmatzidis, 2003). Some research has found that when
high skin and core temperatures increase cardiovascular strain, heat
exposure results in faster reaction times where individuals respond
more quickly, but less accurately when in the heat (Simmons et al.,
2008). Other research, such as Mazloumi et al. (2014), found that heat
stress conditions impair selective attention (the ability to select and
focus on a particular task while simultaneously ignoring other stimuli)
and reaction time. In their study of 70 workers in Iran, where half of
the workers experienced heat stress and half worked in air-
conditioning, the authors found impaired psychomotor function among the
exposed workers indicated through an increase in the duration of a task
and response time as well as an increase in the number of errors
(Mazloumi et al., 2014).
Additional studies examine the impacts of high skin and core
temperatures on psychomotor function contributing to more mistakes
(Allan and Gibson, 1979; Gibson and Allan, 1979; Gibson et al., 1980).
In one study of foundry workers, response time, reaction time, and
number of errors were reported to be adversely affected when workers
were exposed to WBGTs of 31-35 [deg]C (87.8-95 [deg]F) compared to
unexposed workers in a WBGT of 17 [deg]C (62.6 [deg]F) (Mazlomi et al.,
2017). A meta-analysis review of 23 studies supports these conclusions,
finding that under hot conditions, performance on mathematical-related
tasks and reaction time tasks can be negatively impacted at 32.2 [deg]C
(89.9 [deg]F) with a roughly 15% average decrement in performance
(Pilcher et al., 2002).
Pyschomotor performance is an important factor when considering job
tasks that require precision and concentration to prevent injuries. In
a study observing steel plant workers, it was found that electrical arc
melting workers who were exposed to hotter environments (30-33.2 [deg]C
WBGT) experienced a significant decrease in their attention span and
slower response time compared to the continuous cast workers, who
worked in cooler environments (25.4-28.7 [deg]C WBGT) (Chen et al.,
2003). A decline in psychomotor function could also negatively affect
speed of response, reasoning ability, associative learning, mental
alertness, and visual perception, which has been reported as a key
cause of fatal accidents (Rowlinson et al., 2014).
B. Impaired Mental Performance
The effects of heat exposure on mental performance can also play a
significant role in increasing workplace accidents and injuries and
compromise workplace safety. Heat exposure can result in impaired
cognition or cognitive performance; impaired visual motor tracking; and
impaired decision-making or judgment, which can lead to unsafe
behaviors (like the removal of required PPE). Each of these are
discussed in turn below.
I. Impaired Cognition or Cognitive Performance
Declines in cognitive function from heat are correlated with an
elevated risk of injury. Evidence indicates a statistically significant
increase in unsafe behaviors above 23 [deg]C WBGT and an increased risk
of accidents (Ramsey et al., 1983). When an individual experiences
hyperthermia, even if it is mild and only occurring for a short period,
the central nervous system is vulnerable to damage (Hancock and
Vasmatzidis, 2003). This can acutely affect memory, attention, and
ability to process information (Walter and Carraretto, 2016). When
hyperthermia triggers cerebral damage, these cerebral injuries can be
characterized into three broad areas. The first area includes cellular
effects (where cells are damaged as temperatures continue to rise and
normal cell function is disrupted and cell replication is no longer
possible). The second area includes local effects (like inflammatory
changes and vascular damage), and the third area includes systemic
changes (like changes in cerebral blood flow (Walter and Carraretto,
2016). These negative effects are typically seen when core body
temperatures reach 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F), although some changes can
begin at temperatures of 38 [deg]C (100.4 [deg]F) (Walter and
Carraretto, 2016). These physiological changes also negatively impact
cognitive performance.
Heat exposure has been shown to affect cognitive performance
[[Page 70731]]
differentially, based on type of cognitive task (Yeoman et al., 2022).
The more complex a task, especially if it requires motor accuracy, the
more likely an individual's cognitive ability to perform the task will
decline because of heat stress (Hancock and Vasmatzidis, 2003). Some
research indicates a decrease in cognitive performance for tasks
requiring more perceptual motor skills will be observed in the 30-33
[deg]C (80-91.4 [deg]F) range, well before the physiological system
reaches its tolerance limit (Ramsey and Kwon, 1992; Hancock and
Vasmatzidis, 2003; Piil et al., 2017). Ramsey and Kwon (1992) have
summarized over 150 studies looking at task exposure time and task type
and found statistically significant performance decrements at the 30-33
[deg]C (80-91.4 [deg]F) range. The decrements at this range occurred
regardless of duration of exposure (from short exposures under 30
minutes and longer exposures up to 8 hours) (Ramsey and Kwon, 1992).
Furthermore, in a case study of nine male volunteers, results indicate
that highly motivated subjects were strongly affected by heat load
within the first two hours of exposure, and that these subjects'
performance was significantly impaired when assigned complex tasks
requiring a significant amount of reasoning and judgment (Epstein et
al., 1980). The authors found that performance began to decrease when
workers were exposed to temperatures above 27 [deg]C (80.6 [deg]F).
Moreover, in a review of fifteen laboratory experiments assessing
the effects of high ambient temperature on mental performance, one
study found that mental performance declines were statistically
significant at exposure durations of four consecutive hours in 87
[deg]F (30.55 [deg]C) temperatures (Wing, 1965). Similarly, in a study
of the effects of hot-humid and hot-dry environments on mental
functioning, 25 participants were exposed to a variety of temperatures
in humid and dry conditions, while performing physical exercises with
bouts of rest, to assess mental alertness, associative learning,
reasoning ability and dual-performance efficiency (Sharma et al.,
1983). The authors found that all the psychological functions tested
were adversely affected under heat stress, and that a significant drop
in various psychological functions was seen at temperatures of 32.2
[deg]C (89.9 [deg]F) and 33.3 [deg]C (91.9 [deg]F) in hot-humid and
hot-dry conditions, respectively. Moreover, the authors suggest that,
for heat-acclimatized subjects who continuously work for four hours,
that the temperature should not exceed 31.1 [deg]C (87.9 [deg]F) in hot
and humid conditions, and 32.2 [deg]C (89.9 [deg]F) for workers in hot
desert conditions (Sharma et al., 1983).
II. Impaired Visual-Motor Tracking
Hyperthermia and dehydration, a common symptom of heat exposure,
have been found to impair visual-motor tracking (i.e., the eyes'
ability to focus on and follow an object), increasing the risk of
workplace injury. In a review of studies on hydration and cognition,
the authors indicate that a 2% or more loss of body weight due to
dehydration from heat and exercise can result in significant reduction
in visual-motor tracking (Lieberman, 2007). In an experimental study
assessing performance in complex motor tasks in hyperthermic humans
(Piil et al., 2017), the authors found that visual-motor tracking
performance was reduced following exercise-induced hyperthermia.
Participants were exposed to hot (40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F)) and control
(20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F)) conditions. At baseline, and after exercise,
participants completed simple and complex motor tasks, which included
visual tracking assessment. The authors concluded that visual-motor
tracking is impaired by hyperthermia, and especially so when multiple
tasks are combined (Piil et al., 2017).
III. Impaired Decision-Making or Judgment
Heat exposure has been found to affect decision-making or judgment
amongst workers, increasing the risk of injury. In a review of
ecological, cross-sectional, and cohort studies, as well as
epidemiological experiments, Xiang, et al. indicate that core
temperature elevation and dehydration impair judgment and concentration
(Xiang, et al., 2014a). In a study analyzing over 17,000 observations
of unsafe behavioral acts (e.g. mishandling tools, equipment, or
materials) in two industrial facilities with varying temperature
conditions, authors found that unsafe behavioral acts decreased within
the zone of preferred temperature (approximately 17 [deg]C (62.6
[deg]F) to 23 [deg]C (73.4 [deg]F), WBGT) and increased outside of this
zone (when the temperature was equal to or less than 17 [deg]C WBGT or
equal to or greater than 23 [deg]C WBGT) (Ramsey et al., 1983). This
study indicates that the risk of unsafe behavioral acts may increase
when the temperature increases.
C. Other Factors Contributing to Heat-Related Injury
In addition to psychomotor and mental impairments that can result
from heat exposure, other mechanisms may also contribute to heat-
related injuries. The purpose of this section is to summarize some
additional factors that may exacerbate the risk of workplace heat-
related injuries and to provide information to better inform workers
and employers about those hazards.
PPE is another factor that plays a role in increasing
susceptibility to a heat-related injury given that some PPE insolates
the body and reduces evaporative cooling capacity. For instance,
research among firefighters finds that a self-contained breathing
apparatus can lead to heat buildup and can impact postural stability
and balance (Hur et al., 2015; Hur et al., 2013; Games et al., 2020;
Mani et al., 2013; Ross, 2016). Other examples of PPE that may result
in heat stress, and therefore increase the risk of heat-related
injuries, include reflective vests that are made of water impermeable
material that block effective heat dissipation and safety helmets with
no ventilation that can raise the temperature inside the helmet. In one
case, the air temperature inside a worker's helmet (57 [deg]C (134.6
[deg]F)) was measured to be over 20 [deg]C hotter than the
environmental temperature (33 [deg]C (91.4 [deg]F)) they were working
in (Rowlinson et al., 2014). The authors found that workers will often
remove helmets in these situations to alleviate heat stress, exposing
them to other workplace hazards (e.g., falling objects) (Rowlinson et
al., 2014). Other research by Karthick et al. (2023) found that in hot
weather conditions, physical health challenges, specifically major
accidents at the job site, minor injuries, physical fatigue, excessive
sweating, and dermatological problems were found to be significant
based on a workers' clothing comfort. The authors highlighted how PPE
can make workers feel uncomfortable, and when combined with extremely
hot weather, it creates fatigue which may increase the number of
workplace injuries and accidents (Karthick et al., 2023).
There is also evidence indicating heat exposure can contribute to
impaired vision, which may lead to workplace injuries. For example,
fogged safety glasses or sweat in eyes due to heat exposure can reduce
workers' visibility, creating additional hazards and increasing risk of
injury (NIOSH, 2016). Individual case studies also report issues with
protective eyewear in hot temperatures, noting the uncomfortable
feeling of the eyewear under heat and in sunlight as well as difficulty
seeing through the glasses (Choudhry and Fang, 2008). In a survey
conducted among occupational health and safety professionals in
Australia, one of the most frequently cited causes of heat-
[[Page 70732]]
related injuries was from ``impaired vision due to fogged safety
glasses (39%)'' (Varghese et al., 2020). Injuries resulting from
impaired vision may include manual handling (musculoskeletal injuries),
joint/ligament injuries, hand injuries, wounds or lacerations, burns,
head or neck injuries, motor vehicle accidents, eye injuries, or
fractures (Varghese et al., 2020).
When exposed to heat, workers may also experience impaired
dexterity (or fine motor skills) leading to workplace injuries. For
example, sweaty palms and hands due to heat exposure can reduce
workers' ability to handle tools or other work-related materials,
increasing the risk of injury. Occupational health and safety
professionals have reported losing control of tools as one of the most
common causes for heat-related injuries (Varghese et al., 2020).
Researchers have also found sweaty palms to increase the risk of
workplace injuries (Shulte et al., 2016).
IV. Summary
The scientific and mechanistic data and association studies on
heat-related injuries summarized in this section demonstrate that heat-
related injuries are a recognized health effect of occupational heat
exposure. While the types of heat-related injuries can be broad, the
scientific community recognizes that heat exposure can diminish the
body's senses through various mechanisms like impaired psychomotor
performance (e.g., fatigue, impaired balance, or impaired dexterity),
and impaired mental performance (e.g., impaired cognition or vision)
which can result in various types of injuries. The best available
evidence demonstrates that heat-related injuries can have serious
adverse effects on worker safety and health.
Q. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests information and comments on the following question
and requests that stakeholders provide any relevant data, information,
or additional studies (or citations) supporting their view, and explain
the reasoning for including such studies:
Has OSHA adequately identified and documented the studies
and other information relevant to its conclusions regarding heat-
related health effects, and are there additional studies OSHA should
consider?
V. Risk Assessment
A. Risk Assessment
I. Introduction
In this risk assessment, OSHA relied on surveillance data of
occupational heat-related fatalities and non-fatal injuries and
illnesses reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Additionally, OSHA relied on annual incidence estimates derived from
State workers' compensation systems and hospital discharge datasets.
These estimates were calculated and reported in a variety of sources,
such as reports from State health departments, as well as the peer-
reviewed scientific literature. OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
inclusion criteria for HRIs in these data sources (days away from work,
workers' compensation claim, emergency department visit, or inpatient
hospitalization) demonstrate that the HRIs are a material impairment of
health, thus making these data sources relevant to OSHA's determination
of significant risk.
OSHA has previously relied on such injury, illness, and death data
to demonstrate the extent of risk (see, e.g., Fall Protection, 81 FR
82494 (2016); Working Conditions in Shipyards, 76 FR 24576 (2011);
Permit-Required Confined Spaces, 58 FR 4462, 4465 (1993) (finding
significant risk based on available accident data showing that confined
space hazards had caused deaths and injuries); Hazard Communication, 48
FR 53280, 53284-85, 53321 (1983) (finding significant risk of harm from
inadequate chemical hazard communication based on BLS chemical source
injury and illness data)).
Estimating annual incidence among heat-exposed workers (i.e., the
number of annual work-related HRIs divided by the number of heat-
exposed workers) requires being able to accurately estimate the number
of exposed workers and using that number in the denominator.
Unfortunately, there is no published estimate for the number of U.S.
workers exposed to hazardous heat on the job and the majority of the
incidence estimates that OSHA identified used a denominator that would
include both exposed and unexposed workers. This use of a larger
denominator has the effect of diluting the resulting annual incidence
estimates. For instance, BLS estimates and reports annual incidence of
injuries and illnesses involving days away from work that were the
result of ``exposure to environmental heat,'' but in their calculation,
BLS captures the broader U.S. workforce in the denominator, which
includes a large number of unexposed workers (e.g., office workers in
climate-controlled buildings).
Some of the annual incidence estimates that OSHA identified, such
as those based on workers' compensation claims in California and
Washington State, were stratified by sector, industry, or occupation.
OSHA considers these incidence estimates to be helpful in getting to a
more accurate estimate of risk among heat-exposed workers, specifically
the sectors, industries, and occupations where exposure to hazardous
heat on the job is more common. Furthermore, OSHA identified incidence
estimates from cohort data in which the entire cohort was presumed to
be exposed to hazardous heat on the job. These estimates are much
higher than the estimates based on surveillance data. One potential
reason for this difference is that the denominator used in the cohort
studies contains much less unexposed worker-time.
In the following sections (V.A.II., and V.A.III.), OSHA has
summarized the best available incidence data that the agency
identified. Given the limitations with these data, OSHA relied on this
incidence data as a range of possible incidence estimates with the
assumption that many of these estimates represent a lower bound and
that the true incidence is likely higher.
II. Reported Annual Incidence of Nonfatal Occupational Heat-Related
Injuries and Illnesses
A. BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses
The BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) is the
primary nationwide source of surveillance data for nonfatal
occupational injuries and illnesses. The scope includes both private
and public (State and local government) sector employees, but excludes
the self-employed, workers on farms with 10 or fewer employees, private
household workers, volunteers, and Federal Government employees. The
data are derived from a two-stage sampling process, during which a
sample of employers are surveyed and report to BLS the number of
injuries and illnesses occurring at their workplace. To reduce the
reporting burden on employers, BLS only requires detailed case
information on a sample of the injuries and illnesses that occurred at
each establishment. BLS uses these survey responses to estimate the
counts and incidence for nonfatal injuries and illnesses across all
workplaces. In estimating annual incidence, BLS uses a denominator of
full-time equivalent (FTE) workers,
[[Page 70733]]
which is based on 2,000 hours worked per year (i.e., 40 hours per week
over 50 weeks). Relevant Occupational Injury and Illness Classification
System (OIICS) v2.01 event and nature codes for this proposed standard
include ``Exposure to environmental heat'' (event code-531) and
``Effects of heat and light'' (nature codes beginning in 172-). Codes
beginning with 172- include heat stroke and heat exhaustion (among
other outcomes) but exclude sunburn and loss of consciousness without
reference to heat. For more information about OIICS codes generally,
see Section IV., Health Effects.
Between 2011 and 2020, there were an estimated 33,890 work-related
injuries and illnesses that involved days away from work that were
coded with event code 531, for an annual average of 3,389 such injuries
and illnesses during this period (BLS 2023b). In 2023, BLS reported
biennial rather than annual estimates for work-related injuries and
illnesses that involved days away from work (as well as for the first
time reporting an estimate of injuries and illnesses involving job
restriction or job transfer). The biennial estimate for 2021-2022 for
heat-related cases meeting either of these criteria was 6,550 (5,560
cases involved days away from work; 990 cases involved job transfer or
restriction) (BLS 2023g). The estimated annual heat-related injury and
illness incidence (for cases involving days away from work) calculated
by BLS for all workers covered by SOII from 2011-2020 varied by year
but ranged from 2.0/100,000 workers to 4.0/100,000 workers. The average
estimated annual incidence for the entire time period was 3.0/100,000
workers. However, as stated above, OSHA considers these incidence
estimates to be underestimated for heat-exposed workers because BLS
calculates the incidence rate for the entire U.S. workforce covered by
SOII. Therefore, they are including workers who are not exposed to
hazardous heat. In subsectors and industries where OSHA expects a
greater proportion of workers to be exposed to hazardous heat, the
incidence rate estimates are much higher. For instance, according to
unpublished data from BLS SOII for the period 2011-2020, the crop
production subsector (NAICS code 111) had an annual average incidence
of 14.2/100,000 workers, and the specialty trade contractors subsector
(NAICS code 238) had an annual average of 9.3/100,000 workers. This was
also true of subsectors with primarily indoor workers where OSHA
expects a greater proportion of those workers to be exposed to
hazardous heat, including the primary metal manufacturing subsector
(NAICS code 331), which had an annual average incidence of 13.1/100,000
workers for the period 2011-2020.
B. Workers' Compensation Claims
Workers' compensation claims are an alternative way to quantify
occupational injuries and illnesses, particularly those that involve
outpatient medical treatment, inpatient hospitalization, intensive
care, and/or lost workdays. OSHA identified five papers and a report
from Wisconsin that have evaluated State workers' compensation data and
calculated statewide incidence for heat-related injuries and illnesses.
I. Washington State
The earliest of these, a paper by Bonauto et al., in 2007,
evaluated workers' compensation claims submitted to and accepted by the
Washington State Fund between 1995 and 2005 (Bonauto et al., 2007). The
State Fund is the sole provider of workers' compensation insurance to
Washington employers unless they are self-insured or fall under an
alternative system (e.g., Federal employees) and it covers
approximately two-thirds of the State's workers. Certain workers are
exempt from mandatory coverage, such as self-employed and household
workers. The authors identified heat-related cases using the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z16.2 codes \2\ submitted in the
claims by workers or their physicians, the ICD-9 codes submitted on
bills from healthcare providers and hospitals, and a physician review
of cases that included relevant Z16.2 or ICD-9 codes. The researchers
used all ICD-9 codes beginning in 992 (``Effects of heat and light,''
specifically 992.0-992.9) and the ANSI Z16.2 type code 151 (``Contact
with general heat--atmosphere or environment''). ICD-9 codes were not
available for claims from the self-insured, so the authors restricted
the analysis to State Fund claims only. They also excluded claims in
which the employer's physical location was outside of Washington
(n=12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The American National Standards Institute, or ANSI, created
a standard for occupational health and safety metrics in 1962
(revised in 1969) referred to as ANSI Z16. The first version of
OIICS was based on the ANSI coding scheme. ANSI revised the Z16
standard in 1995 and adopted the OIICS scheme in that revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the 11-year study period, 480 accepted claims met the authors'
inclusion criteria after physician review, in which they identified and
removed cases where the recorded illness had been miscoded, contained
incorrect data, or represented a burn. Most of the 480 claims (n=442;
92.1%) were medical-only claims, meaning the State Fund only paid for
the medical bills and did not compensate the worker otherwise (e.g.,
wage replacement, disability benefits). The claims included the
employer's NAICS code, which the authors used to stratify cases by
industry sectors and industries. Employers covered under the Washington
State Fund are required to report hours worked by their employees every
quarter (i.e., three-month increments), which the authors used to
estimate denominators for rates assuming 2,000 work hours is 1 FTE.
This means the authors could calculate rates for certain portions of
the year rather than the whole year without needing to divide by the
total number of annual workers (i.e., they could adjust for hours
worked only during the specified portion). The employment reporting by
quarter also allowed for the authors to estimate claim rates for the
third quarter only (July, August, and September), which corresponded to
the time of year with the ``greatest level of exposure to elevated
environmental temperatures'' (Bonauto et al., 2007, p. 5).
The authors reported an average annual claim rate (which can be
thought of similarly to an injury or illness incidence rate) of 3.1
claims/100,000 FTE for the overall workforce covered by the State Fund
during the study period, with annual rates ranging from 1.9 to 5.1/
100,000 FTE. They reported a corresponding average third-quarter claim
rate of 8.6 claims/100,000 FTE for the overall workforce covered by the
State Fund during the study period. In their paper, Bonauto et al.
report annual and third-quarter rates for all sectors and industries
that had more than five claims during the study period. The sectors (2-
digit NAICS) with the highest annual average claim rates were:
1. Construction (12.1/100,000 FTE),
2. Public administration (12.0/100,000 FTE),
3. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (5.2/100,000 FTE),
4. Administrative and support and waste management and remediation
services (3.9/100,000 FTE), and
5. Transportation and warehousing (3.5/100,000 FTE).
The corresponding average third-quarter claim rates for these
sectors were more than double the annual averages: 33.8/100,000 FTE,
31.2/100,000 FTE, 12.6/100,000 FTE, 9.9/100,000 FTE, and 10.6/100,000
FTE, respectively. This pattern was also true
[[Page 70734]]
for some sectors with a majority of indoor claims. For example,
Manufacturing (3.0/100,000 FTE vs. 7.6/100,000 FTE) and Accommodation
and food services (1.7/100,000 FTE vs. 5.1/100,000 FTE).
The industries (6-digit NAICS) with the highest annual average
claim rates were:
1. Fire protection (80.8/100,000 FTE),
2. Roofing construction (59.0/100,000 FTE),
3. Highway, street and bridge construction (44.8/100,000 FTE),
4. Site preparation construction (35.9/100,000 FTE) (tie), and
5. Poured concrete foundation and structural construction (35.9/
100,000 FTE) (tie).
Similar to the pattern observed among sectors, the corresponding
third-quarter claim rates for the top 5 industries were more than
double the annual averages, except for fire protection--158.8/100,000
FTE, 161.2/100,000, 105.6/100,000 FTE, 106.5/100,000 FTE, and 102.6/
100,000 FTE, respectively. This was also true for restaurants: limited
service restaurants (2.4/100,000 FTE vs. 6.0/100,000 FTE) and full
service restaurants (1.6/100,000 FTE vs. 5.3/100,000 FTE). These
industries have few to no outdoor claims, indicating that even some
industries that involve primarily indoor work are at higher risk in the
summer months.
A follow-up paper to Bonauto et al., 2007, published in 2014,
examined heat-related illnesses among workers in Washington State in
certain agriculture and forestry subsectors between 1995 and 2009
(Spector et al., 2014). The State changed their injury and illness
codes from ANSI to OIICS in July 2005, so for this paper, the
researchers used a combination of ANSI (prior to July 2005), OIICS
(beginning in July 2005), and ICD-9 codes to identify potential heat-
related claims and then reviewed each claim to ensure it was heat-
related. These authors used additional ICD-9 codes that were not
included in the 2007 paper, specifically: prickly heat (705.1),
hyperosmolality and/or hypernatremia (276.0), volume depletion (276.5
and 276.50), dehydration (276.51), hypovolemia (276.52), and acute
renal failure (584 and 584.9). The authors identified 84 accepted
claims meeting their eligibility criteria, the majority of which (n=76;
90%) were medical only claims. Of the 84 claims, 61 (73%) met the
diagnostic code criteria used in the 2007 paper (ICD-9 codes beginning
in 992). The average annual claim rate for the agriculture and forestry
subsectors the authors examined over the 15-year period was 7.0/100,000
FTE and the average third-quarter (July-September) claim rate was 15.7/
100,000 FTE. The majority of claims (61%) were among crop production
and support workers (NAICS 111 or 1151).
A second follow-up paper to Bonauto et al., 2007, was published in
2020 and included all Washington State Fund-covered workers over a more
recent 12-year period, 2006 to 2017 (Hesketh et al., 2020). The authors
used similar methods, except for different screening criteria for
ascertaining cases prior to investigators reviewing each case. To
identify potential heat-related claims, they used OIICS v1.01 event/
exposure code 321, OIICS nature code 072*, OIICS source codes 9362 and
9392 (Sun), and the ICD-9 codes used in Spector et al., 2014. (Note
that these OIICS codes are v1.01 OIICS, which was the coding scheme
used from 1992-2010. BLS updated the coding scheme in 2010, which first
applied to 2011 data.) The State adopted ICD-10 coding in October 2015,
so the following ICD-10 codes were used for claims after that date:
E86* (Volume depletion), T67* (Effects of heat and light), T73.2*
(Exhaustion due to exposure), W92* (Exposure to excessive heat of man-
made origin), X30* (Exposure to excessive natural heat), and Z57.6
(Occupational exposure to extreme temperature). The researchers
excluded claims in which service date for treatment of dehydration or
kidney failure was not within one day of the illness date or claims in
which dehydration or kidney failure were the only identifiers flagged,
as they noted that these cases often did not represent heat-related
illnesses.
The authors reported a total of 918 confirmed heat-related claims,
of which 654 (71%) were accepted claims. Of the accepted claims, 595
(91%) were medical-only claims. Using only accepted claims, they
estimated an average annual claim rate of 3.2 claims/100,000 FTE for
the overall workforce covered by the State Fund during the study period
(Communication with David Bonauto and June Spector, June 2024). Similar
to Bonauto et al., 2007, the authors reported claim rates for all
sectors and industries with more than 11 claims. The sectors (2-digit
NAICS) with the highest annual average accepted claim rates were:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (13.0/100,000 FTE),
2. Construction (10.8/100,000 FTE),
3. Public administration (10.3/100,000 FTE),
4. Administrative and support and waste management and remediation
services (4.6/100,000 FTE), and
5. Transportation and Warehousing (3.8/100,000 FTE).
The average third-quarter (July-September) claim rates for some
sectors were more than 10 times greater than the average annual rates.
These third-quarter claim rates were also much higher than those
calculated for 1995-2005 in Bonauto et al., 2007. The sectors with the
highest average third-quarter accepted claim rates were:
1. Public administration (131.3/100,000 FTE),
2. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (102.6/100,000 FTE),
3. Construction (70.0/100,000 FTE),
4. Administrative and support and waste management and remediation
services (61.5/100,000 FTE), and
5. Wholesale trade (44.9/100,000 FTE).
The industries (6-digit NAICS) with the highest annual average
accepted claims rates were:
1. Farm labor contractors and crew leaders (77.3/100,000 FTE),
2. Fire protection (60.0/100,000 FTE),
3. Structural steel and precast concrete contractors (54.2/100,000
FTE),
4. Poured concrete foundation and structure contractors (31.6/
100,000 FTE), and
5. Roofing contractors (29.0/100,000 FTE).
The ratio between third-quarter rates and annual rates for all
industries reported in table 3 of the paper ranged from 2.5-13.7, with
the highest average third-quarter accepted claim rates in the following
industries:
1. Farm labor contractors and crew leaders (600.9/100,000 FTE),
2. Fire protection (394.6/100,000 FTE),
3. Administration of conservation programs (282.7/100,000 FTE),
4. Site preparation contractors (232.1/100,000 FTE), and
5. Poured concrete foundation and structure contractors (172.3/
100,000 FTE).
II. California
A group of researchers conducted a similar analysis for the State
of California, using data from the California Workers' Compensation
Information System (WCIS) between 2000 and 2017 (Heinzerling et al.,
2020). Virtually all California employees are required to be covered by
workers' compensation; voluntary, non-compensated workers, owners, and
workers covered under separate programs are excluded. The WCIS contains
all accepted and rejected workers' compensation claims in the State
since 2000 that required medical treatment beyond first aid or more
than
[[Page 70735]]
one day of lost work time. The investigators identified heat-related
claims in the system using WCIS-specific nature of injury and cause of
injury codes (e.g., ``temperature extremes''), heat-related illness
keywords (e.g., ``heat stroke''), and certain ICD-9 (992.0-992.9 and
E900.0-E900.9) and ICD-10 (T67.0-T67.9, X30, and W92) codes. They also
manually reviewed all claims that met only the ICD code identification
criteria to ensure the claims were heat-related, as some of the codes
they used to identify claims were not specific to heat-related illness
or injury. In WCIS, the employer's industry is coded using NAICS codes
classified by the claims adjusters. The authors converted the NAICS
codes into the appropriate 2002 census industry codes using the NIOSH
Industry and Occupation Computerized Coding System (NIOCCS). This was
necessary to obtain the corresponding employment denominator estimates
from the NIOSH Employed Labor Force Tool, which relies on data from the
Current Population Survey (CPS), a Census Bureau survey conducted for
BLS. The CPS data provide estimates of all employed and non-
institutionalized civilian workers over the age of 15. To account for
changes in coding schemes implemented in 2002, the investigators
extrapolated 2002-2017 data to estimate denominators for 2000 and 2001.
The authors excluded claims for workers below 16 years of age
(n=104 claims) and institutionalized workers (n=455 claims), as these
workers are excluded from CPS data. They reported a final estimate of
15,996 claims meeting their inclusion criteria, corresponding to an
overall annual claims rate of 6.0/100,000 workers. Industry and
occupation codes were available for 86% and 74% of the included claims,
respectively. The authors reported claim rates for all sectors, but the
sectors with the highest annual claim rates were:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (38.6/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 26.9, 40.4),
2. Public administration (35.3/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 34.3,
36.3),
3. Mining (21.3/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 17.6, 25.7),
4. Utilities (11.4/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 10.1, 12.8), and
5. Administrative and support and waste management (8.8/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 8.3, 9.3).
The major occupational groups with the highest annual claim rates
were:
1. Protective services (56.7/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 54.9, 58.7),
2. Farming, fishing, and forestry (35.9/100,000 workers; 95% CI:
34.1, 37.9),
3. Material moving (12.3/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 11.5, 13.1),
4. Construction and extraction (8.9/100,000 workers; 95% CI: 8.4,
9.4), and
5. Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance (6.0/100,000
workers; 95% CI: 5.6, 6.5).
III. Texas
Another study examined workers' compensation claims in an unnamed,
mid-sized Texas city before and after an intervention among a cohort of
604 municipal workers and calculated the incidence of HRI claims from
2009 to 2017 (McCarthy et al., 2019). The municipal departments
included in the study were picked because the job descriptions for
workers within each included work in hot environments with moderate and
heavy physical activity. These departments were Streets and Traffic,
Parks and Recreation, Utilities, and Solid Waste. After removing
worker-time contributed by administrative personnel who were not
exposed to heat on the job, the remaining worker-time represented 329
FTEs per year. Prior to the intervention in 2011, the heat-exposed
workers experienced 17 total HRIs between 2009 and 2010. The authors
reported an average annual rate of HRIs among the heat-exposed workers
during this time of 25.5/1,000 FTEs (McCarthy et al., 2019, Figure 2).
These estimates are much higher than other incidence estimates reported
in this section, possibly because the denominator is solely comprised
of heat-exposed workers. This explanation is supported by evidence of
higher incidences reported in other cohort studies (e.g., approximately
3 HRIs/1,000 National Guard troops involved in flood relief activities
between July 5 and August 18, 1993, calculated from data in Dellinger
et al., 1996). The results of the voluntary intervention are discussed
in Section V.C., Risk Reduction.
IV. Wisconsin
Finally, a report issued by the Wisconsin Occupational Health and
Safety Surveillance Program in 2024 summarized an analysis of heat-
related workers' compensation claims in the State from 2010-2022 (Fall
et al., 2024). The authors analyzed lost work time claims (under
Wisconsin workers' compensation, there must be more than three days of
lost work time to be compensable) reported by both insurance carriers
and self-insured employers and reported rates by industry sector and
industry subsector (rather than overall workforce rates). These do not
include medical-only claims, which were the majority of HRI claims
reported in the Washington State Fund database. The authors reported
cumulative claim rates only. To convert cumulative rates to annual
average rates, OSHA divided the reported rates by 13 (the number of
years' worth of data reported). The sectors with the highest annual
average claim rates were:
1. Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation
Services (2.9/100,000 FTE),
2. Public Administration (2.8/100,000 FTE),
3. Wholesale Trade (1.9/100,000 FTE),
4. Construction (1.4/100,000 FTE), and
5. Transportation and Warehousing (1.1/100,000 FTE).
The major occupational groups with the highest annual average
claims rates were:
1. Protective Service (4.1/100,000 FTE),
2. Transportation and Material Moving (2.6/100,000 FTE),
3. Production (1.6/100,000 FTE),
4. Construction and Extraction (1.5/100,000 FTE), and
5. Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance (1.5/100,000 FTE).
Similarly, the minor occupational groups with the highest annual
average claims rates were:
1. Fire Fighting and Prevention (14.7/100,000 FTE),
2. Material Moving Workers (3.3/100,000 FTE),
3. Metal and Plastic Workers (2.8/100,000 FTE),
4. Motor Vehicle Operations (2.2/100,000 FTE), and
5. Assemblers and Fabricators (2.2/100,000 FTE).
C. Emergency Department (ED) Visits and Inpatient Hospitalizations
Another way to quantify occupational injury and illnesses requiring
medical treatment is to use data reported directly by hospitals to
public health departments or national databases, such as the National
Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). Data in NEISS are
estimated from a nationally representative probability sample of
hospitals across the country, which report data for every injury-
related ED visit. A paper from 2010 analyzed NEISS data for heat-
related emergency department visits from 2001-2004 (Sanchez et al.,
2010). The authors reported an annual average of 8,376 work-related ED
visits for nonfatal heat injuries and illnesses. OSHA used annual
average employment estimates from NIOSH's Employed Labor Force query
system for 2001-2004 (both total workers and FTEs) to estimate a
nationwide annual average rate of 6.1
[[Page 70736]]
visits/100,000 workers and 6.3 visits/100,000 FTEs from this study.
More recent studies estimating the incidence of work-related ED visits
and/or hospitalizations for HRIs within individual or multiple States
are discussed below.
I. Southeast U.S.
A group of public health researchers from nine States in the
Southeast (Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia) used hospital
discharge data reported directly to State health departments to
characterize rates of heat-related inpatient hospitalization and ED
visits among workers from 2007--2011 (Harduar Morano et al., 2015). The
researchers used ICD-9 codes to identify heat-related cases,
specifically 992.0-992.9, E900.0, E900.1, and E900.9. To assess work-
relatedness, they determined whether the expected payer was workers'
compensation or if a work-related external cause of injury code
(sometimes referred to as E-codes) was noted by the physician (e.g.,
E000.0 Civilian activity done for income). They restricted cases only
to those where the patient was at least 16 years old but included both
State residents and non-residents in reported case counts. To calculate
rates, the investigators used CPS data for estimating denominators,
which were age-adjusted using direct standardization and population
weights for the entire U.S. Non-residents were not included in the rate
calculations. The authors noted that hospital discharge data weren't
available for every year in every State and that the missing data were
primarily for discharges following ED visits.
Across the five-year study period, the authors identified 8,315
occupational heat-related ED visits (7,664 of these among residents, or
92%), which corresponded to an overall age-adjusted rate of 6.5 visits/
100,000 workers (95% confidence interval, CI = 6.4, 6.7). While they
reported rates for each State (e.g., 4.8 visits/100,000 workers in
Florida and 17.3 visits/100,000 workers in Louisiana), they cautioned
against directly comparing between States given differences in the data
collection methods, data availability, and use of work-related
variables. They identified 1,051 occupational heat-related inpatient
hospitalizations (930 among residents, or 88%), which corresponded to
an overall age-adjusted rate of 0.61 hospitalizations/100,000 workers
(95% CI = 0.58, 0.66). The average length of stay for State residents
was 2.7 days, which was comparable to non-residents (2.4 days).
II. Florida
The Florida Department of Health published a similar analysis in
2011 using the same methods for the State of Florida for the years
2005--2009 (Florida DOH, 2011). They identified 2,198 occupational
heat-related hospitalizations and ED visits, which corresponded to an
average overall age-adjusted annual rate of 3.7 cases/100,000 workers
(95% CI = 1.9, 5.5) and a crude rate (no age adjustment) of 5.1/100,000
workers (Communication with Laurel Harduar Morano, October 2023). The
majority of these (89.4%) were ED visits. They identified 3 fatalities
in this subset, which they noted corresponds to a case fatality rate of
1.4 fatalities/1,000 cases. They reported a third-quarter (July,
August, and September) rate of 3.2 cases/100,000 workers using a
denominator of total number of workers, whereas using a denominator of
FTEs instead produced a third-quarter rate of 13.0 cases/100,000 FTE
(Communication with Laurel Harduar Morano, October 2023). A 2016 study
conducted a more in-depth analysis of the statewide Florida
hospitalization data and included data for three additional years
(2010, 2011, and 2012) (Harduar Morano et al., 2016). The authors
restricted the data to cases occurring in May-October of each year and
identified a total of 2,979 work-related ED visits and 415 work-related
hospitalizations between 2005-2012. Using total number of workers in
the denominator (calculated from monthly CPS data), these corresponded
to average annual age-adjusted rates of 8.5 ED visits/100,000 workers
and 1.1 hospitalizations/100,000 workers.
III. Louisiana
In March 2023, the Louisiana Department of Health published a
report on heat-related illnesses in the State using ED and
hospitalization data from 2010-2020 (Louisiana DOH 2023). The authors
used workers' compensation as payer and work-related ICD codes to
determine which cases were among workers. They reported an annual
average of 320 work-related ED visits and 20 work-related
hospitalizations for heat-related illness during this period. Using
State employment data from CPS, the authors calculated an overall age-
adjusted rate of 15.1 work-related ED visits/100,000 workers and 0.9
work-related hospitalizations/100,000 workers. In 2024, the Department
of Health released a syndromic surveillance report on ED visits for
HRIs between April 1 and October 31, 2023 (Louisiana DOH 2024). They
identified 1,412 ED visits for HRIs among workers during this time
period.
IV. Multiple States
Since 2013 over 20 States have reported rates of heat-related ED
visits among workers to the Council of State and Territorial
Epidemiologists (CSTE), comprising the organization's Occupational
Health Indicator #24 (see www.cste.org/page/ohindicatorstable). These
data are compiled by the State health departments using workers'
compensation as primary payer and external cause of injury codes to
determine work-relatedness. Rates are calculated using CPS estimates of
total employed persons by State. While multiple States report their
annual rates to CSTE, the organization cautions against directly
comparing these rates between States because ``workers' compensation
eligibility criteria and availability of data from workers'
compensation programs varies among states, prohibiting state-level data
from being directly compared to other states or with national
estimates.''
Additionally, given that these data are not available for every
State, they cannot be combined to produce an accurate national rate.
The State-reported rates are currently available for 2013-2019. During
this period, the annual rates for heat-related ED visits ranged from
0.1 to 18.7 ED visits per 100,000 workers.
V. Maricopa County, Arizona
Arizona is not one of the States to share their ED visit data to
CSTE, but the most populated county in the State--Maricopa County--has
published a Heat Morbidity Report in which they provide case counts for
heat-related hospitalization discharges, including a breakdown of the
``preceding activity type'' (determined by ICD activity E-codes)
(Maricopa County Public Health Department, n.d.). Using the case counts
reported under ``occupational'' activity type and yearly estimates of
the average annual employment for Maricopa County provided by the BLS
Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, there was an average annual
hospitalization rate among workers of 4.1 cases/100,000 workers (range:
3.1-6.4/100,000) between 2010-2017. Primary payer of workers'
compensation was not used to determine work-relatedness, which means
some occupational cases not involving E-codes may have been missed.
Given that for the majority of cases (77%-83% per year), the preceding
activity was marked as ``unknown'', it's likely that some number of
these were occupational in nature and just not listed as such. This
[[Page 70737]]
is supported by the fact that an ``Industrial Site'' was the place of
injury for, on average, 8% of cases, which may also be an
underestimate. It should be noted that the authors only used the
following ICD-9/ICD-10 activity E-codes to determine work-relatedness:
E011/Y93.C Activities involving computer technology and electronic
devices; E012/Y93.D Activities involving arts and handcrafts; and E016/
Y93.H Activities involving exterior property and land maintenance,
building and construction. To OSHA's knowledge, the authors did not use
any other external cause of injury codes, such as E000.0 Civilian
activity done for income, but it is not clear from the report if these
E-codes were not available or were just not used.
D. Indirect Injuries
As discussed in Section IV.P., Heat Related Injuries, one area of
research has used the natural fluctuations in temperatures to conduct
quasi-experimental studies examining the relationship between heat and
workers' compensation claims for traumatic injuries (e.g., Spector et
al., 2016; Calkins et al., 2019; Dillender 2021; Park et al., 2021).
The findings of these papers suggest that there may be many workers'
compensation claims that are heat-related but not coded as such. For
instance, Park, Pankratz, and Behrer (2021) estimated that
approximately 20,000 injuries per year in California between 2001-2018
resulted from hotter temperatures (relative to ``optimal''
temperature). For comparison, for a similar time period (2000-2017),
Heinzerling et al. (2020) only identified an average of 889 HRI
workers' compensation claims per year in California (a 22-fold
difference), suggesting that relying on workers' compensation claims
coded as HRIs alone does not capture the higher incidence of injuries
of other kinds where heat may have played a role. A research report
from the Workers Compensation Research Institute expanded this type of
analysis to 24 States, using a convenience sample of workers'
compensation claims from May-October 2016-2021 (Negrusa et al., 2024).
They found that the number of injuries increased 3.2-6.1% when the
daily maximum temperature was 75 [deg]F or higher relative to a day
with a daily maximum temperature of 65-70 [deg]F. This relationship was
even more pronounced for the construction industry.
E. Worker Self-Reports
Another source of incidence data is surveys of workers exposed to
heat. Multiple papers describe the results of surveys of outdoor
workers, typically agricultural workers, who are asked about heat-
related symptoms experienced over a week-long period while working in
the summer months (Fleischer et al., 2013; Kearney et al., 2016; Mutic
et al., 2018). Commonly reported symptoms in these studies include
heavy sweating (38-66% of surveyed workers), headache (44-58%), muscle
cramps (30-36%), dizziness (14-32%), weakness or fatigue (18%), and
nausea or vomiting (9-17%). Notably, in two of these studies, multiple
workers reported fainting on the job. A study in southern Georgia found
that 4% of 405 farmworkers experienced fainting within the previous
week, during which the heat index ranged from 100-108 [deg]F (Fleischer
et al., 2013). Another study involved asking 281 farmworkers in North
Carolina if they had ever worked in ``extreme heat.'' Of those
answering ``yes'', 3% reported having ever fainted on the job
(Mirabelli et al., 2010). When asked about symptoms over a single
workday, a separate study found that 25% of workers reported cramps,
22% headache, 10% dizziness, and 3% nausea (Smith et al., 2021).
F. Summary of Reported Annual Incidence of Nonfatal Occupational Heat-
Related Injuries and Illnesses
OSHA identified multiple sources that have reported annual
incidence estimates for nonfatal HRIs among workers. These studies and
reports generally reported heat-related incidence across an entire
workforce (either National or State), using the total workforce as the
denominator. This would understate the risk to workers who are actually
exposed to heat on the job since the denominator includes a large
percentage of workers who are not exposed to heat (e.g., office
workers). Evidence in support of this claim comes from studies showing
higher incidence of HRI when populations are stratified by sector,
industry, or occupation, as well as those reporting incidence that
occurred only during the third quarter (July, August, and September).
For instance, in Heinzerling et al., 2020, the authors report an
overall annual incidence of 6.0/100,000 workers whereas they report an
annual incidence of 38.6/100,000 workers for workers in the
agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting sector (a greater than 6-
fold difference). OSHA considers these stratified estimates to be more
accurate estimates of the ``true'' incidence of HRIs among heat-exposed
workers.
A summary of the annual incidence estimates for nonfatal
occupational HRIs discussed above can be found in table V-1. In the
same table, OSHA calculated the number of non-fatal HRIs that would be
expected over a working lifetime (assuming a working lifetime is 45
years long) based on those annual incidence estimates (i.e., the annual
incidence multiplied by 45). These estimates represent the total number
of HRIs that may be expected to occur in a cohort of 100,000 workers
all of whom enter the workforce at the same time and all of whom work
for 45 years. Estimates of HRI risk over a working lifetime based on
annual incidence among entire working populations (National or State)
range from 90-180/100,000 for HRIs requiring days away from work, 140-
270/100,000 for HRIs leading to a workers' compensation claim, and 4.5-
842/100,000 for HRIs leading to emergency department visits or
inpatient hospitalizations. Like incidence estimates, these values
understate the risk to workers who are actually exposed to heat on the
job since the denominator includes a large percentage of workers who
are not exposed to heat (e.g., office workers). However, when using
incidence estimates specific to individual sectors, industries, or
occupations, the HRI estimates over a working lifetime are much higher,
ranging from 49.5-114,750/100,000 for HRIs leading to a workers'
compensation claim.
III. Reported Occupational Heat-Related Fatalities
The BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI), established
in 1992, is the primary source of surveillance data on work-related
fatalities, including fatalities due to environmental heat exposure,
for the United States. The fatality data in CFOI come from diverse data
sources to identify, verify, and describe work-related fatalities. In
each case, at least two sources (e.g., death certificates, workers'
compensation reports, media reports, and government agency
administrative reports) and an average of four are used to validate
that the fatality was work-related and to verify the event or exposure
leading to death and the nature of injury or illness in each case,
which are then classified with OIICS codes. Heat-related fatalities can
be identified with an event code (``Exposure to environmental heat'')
and/or a nature code (``Effects of heat and light'').
According to BLS's CFOI, occupational heat exposure killed 1,042
U.S. workers between 1992 and 2022 (BLS, 2024c). Between 2011 and 2022,
BLS reports 479 worker deaths, an average of 40 fatalities per year
during that time. During the latest three years
[[Page 70738]]
for which BLS reports data (2020-2022), there was an average of 45
work-related deaths due to exposure to environmental heat per year.
Multiple sources have relied on BLS surveillance data to estimate
annual incidence rates of occupational heat-related fatalities.
Gubernot et al. (2015) calculated overall fatality rates and
fatality rates by industry sector using BLS CFOI data from 2000-2010
(Gubernot et al., 2015). The authors focused on the three industry
sectors with the highest rates in preliminary analyses: Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (NAICS code 11); Construction (NAICS code
23); and Administrative and Support and Waste Management and
Remediation Services (NAICS code 56). All other industry sectors were
combined for comparison as a referent group. The authors used
nationwide worker population data from the CPS to estimate fatality
rates. The CPS data provide estimates of all employed and non-
institutionalized civilian workers over the age of 15.
The authors identified 339 occupational heat-related deaths from
2000-2010, after excluding volunteers and military personnel. They
reported an average annual heat-related fatality rate of 0.022
fatalities per 100,000 workers for the overall workforce.
For the three industry sectors preliminarily identified as having
the highest rates, the authors reported the following average annual
fatality rates:
1. Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting (0.306 fatalities per
100,000 workers),
2. Construction (0.113 fatalities per 100,000 workers), and
3. Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation
Services (0.056 fatalities per 100,000 workers).
For all other industry sectors combined, the average annual
fatality rate was substantially smaller (0.009 fatalities per 100,000
workers). The agriculture and construction sectors combined accounted
for 58% of the fatalities during the study period (n=207).
A CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) from 2008
reported by Luginbuhl et al. investigated heat-related fatalities among
all workers--and agriculture workers in particular--using BLS CFOI data
from 1992-2006 (Luginbuhl et al., 2008). During the study period, the
authors identified 423 deaths related to environmental heat in CFOI
using the OIICS v1.01 event/exposure code 321 (Exposure to
environmental heat) and nature code 072* (Effects of heat and light).
Similar to the approach taken by Gubernot et al., the authors
calculated rates using CPS estimates of the average annual worker
population for denominators.
For the overall workforce, the authors calculated an average annual
incidence of 0.02 fatalities/100,000 workers, which is similar to the
estimate reported by Gubernot et al. for 2000-2010 (0.022/100,000). Of
the 423 fatalities identified, 102 (24%) occurred in the agriculture,
forestry, fishing, and hunting sector (average annual fatality rate of
0.16/100,000 workers) and 68 occurred among workers in crop production
or support activities for crop production (annual fatality rate of
0.39/100,000 workers). The rates for crop workers in North Carolina,
Florida, and California were 2.36/100,000 workers, 0.74/100,000
workers, and 0.49/100,000 workers, respectively. These findings were
later included in a peer-reviewed article (Jackson and Rosenberg 2010).
The editorial note accompanying this MMWR report mentioned, among
other limitations, that CPS estimates used for denominators likely
underestimate the number of crop workers--because of the potential lack
of stable residences among these workers and the seasonal trends in
employment--which would lead to an overestimate of risk for these
workers. This limitation would presumably apply to any rate estimates
calculated with CPS data for this specific population. To OSHA's
knowledge, this is the only reported limitation in the included
articles that would suggest a potential overestimation of incidence.
A third paper analyzed BLS CFOI heat-related fatality data for the
construction sector, estimating fatality rates for various occupations
within the sector using Standard Occupational Classification codes
(Dong et al., 2019). Using the OIICS v2.01 nature code 172* (Effects of
heat and light) to determine heat-relatedness and CPS estimates for
sector-wide and occupation-specific denominators, the authors
identified 82 heat-related construction deaths between 2011-2016 and
estimated an average annual fatality rate for the entire sector (0.15
fatalities/100,000 workers) as well as for specific occupations. The
occupations with the highest fatality rates included cement masons
(1.62/100,000); roofers (1.04/100,000); helpers (1.03/100,000); brick
masons (0.50/100,000); and laborers (0.29/100,000).
Finally, a paper from 2005 by Mirabelli and Richardson identified
heat-related fatalities using medical examiner records from North
Carolina for the period from 1977 to 2001, including 15 years of data
before the creation of CFOI (Mirabelli and Richardson 2005). They
determined that heat was a primary or underlying cause of death based
on ICD-9 codes. The researchers used the decedents' location and
activities reported in the records to determine work-relatedness, and
they excluded cases in which the decedent was <10 years old or those
which involved manufactured sources of heat.
The authors identified 40 occupational heat-related deaths. They
classified 18 of these as farm workers and reported an annual fatality
rate among these farm workers of 1.52 fatalities/100,000 workers. They
reported 10 cases having occurred at a construction site but did not
report a fatality rate for this group of workers. The average annual
fatality rate for the entire State working population was 0.05
fatalities/100,000 workers.
As none of the identified papers reported fatality rates for the
overall workforce for years beyond 2010, OSHA used the heat-related
fatality counts reported by BLS for 2011-2022 (479 worker deaths) and
employment estimates for the same years from CPS to calculate fatality
rates for these years. For the denominator, OSHA used the total number
of workers and average hours worked to estimate total FTEs per year.
The average annual fatality rate during this period was 0.029 deaths/
100,000 FTEs.
A. Summary of Reported Occupational Heat-Related Fatalities
OSHA identified multiple studies that calculated and reported
annual incidence estimates for heat-related fatalities among workers
using data from BLS CFOI or medical examiner records. These studies
reported heat-related fatality rates across an entire workforce (either
National or State), using the total workforce as the denominator. As
mentioned above, this would understate the risk to workers who are
actually exposed to heat on the job since the denominator includes a
large percentage of workers who are not exposed to heat (e.g., office
workers). Evidence in support of this claim comes from studies showing
higher fatality rates when populations are stratified by sector,
industry, or occupation. For instance, in Gubernot et al., 2015, the
authors report an overall annual fatality rate of 0.022/100,000 workers
whereas they report an annual fatality rate of 0.306/100,000 workers
for workers in the agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting sector
(a 14-fold difference). OSHA considers these stratified estimates to be
more accurate estimates of the ``true'' incidence of heat-related
fatalities among heat-exposed workers.
[[Page 70739]]
Table V-1--Estimated Risk of Experiencing a Heat-Related Injury or Illness Annually and Over a 45-Year Working
Lifetime
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expected
number of non-
Average annual fatal HRIs per
Population Source of data rate (per 100,000
100,000 workers over
workers) working
lifetime
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates Based on Entire Working Populations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S., All Workers.......................... BLS SOII Injuries and Illnesses \1\ 2.0-4.0 90-180
Involving Days Away from Work.
State Working Populations.................. Workers' Compensation Records...... \2\ 3.1-6.0 140-270
State Working Populations.................. Emergency Department Visits and/or \3\ 0.1-18.7 4.5-842
Inpatient Hospitalization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates Based on Sector-Specific Groups (2-digit NAICS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting Washington State, 1995-2005........ 5.2 234
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 13.0 585
California, 2000-2017.............. 38.6 1,737
Construction............................... Washington State, 1995-2005........ 12.1 545
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 10.8 486
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.4 63.0
Public Administration...................... Washington State, 1995-2005........ 12 540
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 10.3 464
California, 2000-2017.............. 35.3 1,589
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.8 126
Administrative and support and waste Washington State, 1995-2005........ 3.9 176
management and remediation services. Washington State, 2006-2017........ 4.6 207
California, 2000-2017.............. 8.8 396
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.9 131
Transportation and warehousing............. Washington State, 1995-2005........ 3.5 158
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 3.8 171
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.1 49.5
Utilities.................................. California, 2000-2017.............. 11.4 513
Mining..................................... California, 2000-2017.............. 21.3 959
Wholesale Trade............................ Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.9 85.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates Based on Industry-Specific Groups (6-digit NAICS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm labor contractors and crew leaders.... Washington State, 2006-2017........ 77.3 3,479
Fire protection............................ Washington State, 1995-2005........ 80.8 3,636
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 60.0 2,700
Structural steel and precast concrete...... Washington State, 2006-2017........ 54.2 2,439
Poured concrete foundation and structural Washington State, 1995-2005........ 35.9 1,616
contractors.
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 31.6 1,422
Roofing contractors........................ Washington State, 1995-2005........ 59.0 2,655
Washington State, 2006-2017........ 29.0 1,305
Highway, street, and bridge construction... Washington State, 1995-2005........ 44.8 2,016
Site preparation construction.............. Washington State, 1995-2005........ 35.9 1,616
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates Based on Major Occupational Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protective services........................ California, 2000-2017.............. 56.7 2,552
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 4.1 185
Farming, fishing, and forestry............. California, 2000-2017.............. 35.9 1,616
Transportation and Material moving......... California, 2000-2017.............. 12.3 554
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.6 117
Construction and extraction................ California, 2000-2017.............. 8.9 401
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.5 67.5
Building and grounds cleaning and California, 2000-2017.............. 6.0 270
maintenance.
Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.5 67.5
Production................................. Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 1.6 72.0
Municipal workers in departments governing Texas, 2009-2017................... 2,550 114,750
streets and traffic, parks and recreation,
utilities, and solid waste.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates Based on Minor Occupational Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire Fighting and Prevention............... Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 14.7 662
Material Moving Workers.................... Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 3.3 149
Metal and Plastic Workers.................. Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.8 126
Motor Vehicle Operations................... Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.2 99.0
Assemblers and Fabricators................. Wisconsin, 2010-2022............... 2.2 99.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ranges reflect varying annual average estimates between 2011-2020.
\2\ Ranges reflect values reported in Heinzerling et al., 2020, Bonauto et al., 2007, and Hesketh et al., 2020.
\3\ Ranges reflect values reported in or derived from Harduar Morano et al., 2015, Florida DOH 2011, Louisiana
DOH 2023, Harduar Morano et al., 2016, CSTE, and Maricopa County Public Health Department.
[[Page 70740]]
IV. Limitations and Underreporting
Evidence suggests that existing surveillance data undercount the
total number of heat-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities, among
workers. The incident rates presented in the previous section are
likely vast underestimates both because they use this surveillance data
as the numerator when calculating incidence rates and because they
overestimate the number of workers exposed to hot work environments
(i.e., the denominator for incidence rates). These sources of
uncertainty are described below.
A. Incidence Estimation
Incidence estimates based on BLS data are likely to underestimate
the true risk to workers who are exposed to specific hazards, like
heat, in part because of difficulties in estimating the population of
exposed workers. The current approach for BLS SOII rate estimates is to
use the population of all workers in the U.S. for the denominator, not
just those exposed to the hazard of interest. For instance, the
denominators used for the risk estimates presented above would include
most office workers who work in climate-controlled buildings and would
therefore not have occupational exposure to the levels of heat stress
that have been associated with adverse outcomes. For 2022, BLS reported
116,435,925 full-time workers in the U.S. However, OSHA estimates the
proposed standard would cover approximately 36 million workers,
approximately one-third of the total full-time workers in the U.S.
Therefore, BLS's use of a larger denominator likely underestimates risk
because it includes workers not exposed to hazardous heat and therefore
less likely to experience an HRI.
The denominators for the annual incidence estimates presented above
also include worker-time for the entire year, even though for many
workers, exposure to potentially harmful levels of heat only occurs
during the hottest months of the year. Including unexposed worker-time
in the denominator has the effect of diluting the incidence estimates,
meaning annual incidence estimates do not accurately represent the risk
to workers when they are actually exposed to hazardous heat. The risk
to workers whose jobs do expose them to harmful levels of heat, on the
days on which those exposures occur, would therefore be expected to be
higher than the estimates published by BLS. In addition, using total
worker populations as a basis for estimating incidence likely will
underestimate the risk to particularly susceptible workers, such as
older workers, workers with pre-existing conditions, and workers not
acclimatized to the heat.
OSHA believes that studies that reported illness rates by sector or
occupation provide evidence showing that the annual average illness
rates reported across the entire workforce underestimate risk for
exposed workers. For example, the Washington State and California
workers' compensation studies found that heat-related illness rates for
sector- or occupation-specific populations were substantially higher
than the rates for the general working population in the State
(Heinzerling et al., 2020; Bonauto et al., 2007; Hesketh et al., 2020).
The sectors and occupations examined included those where exposure to
hot environments was more likely than for the population as a whole
(e.g., Construction and Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting).
Additionally, many of the surveillance papers described above also
reported the month in which the injury, illness, or fatality occurred
and found that most cases were clustered in the hotter, summer months
(e.g., June, July, and August). When researchers in Washington and
Florida restricted their rate estimates to include data only for the
third quarter (July, August, and September), they found rates that were
several-fold higher than annual average illness rates over the whole
population, which include many unexposed worker-days.
B. Undercounting of Cases
The general underreporting and undercounting of occupational
injuries and illnesses has been a topic of multiple government reports
(e.g., Ruser, 2008; Miller, 2008; GAO, 2009; Wiatrowski, 2014). The
authors of the peer-reviewed papers described in sections V.A.II., and
V.A.III., above list underreporting or misclassification of cases as a
limitation in their analyses that would have the effect of
underestimating risk.
I. BLS SOII
Two papers from the early 2000s that linked workers' compensation
records to BLS SOII data found evidence that SOII missed a substantial
amount of workers' compensation claims, depending on the State analyzed
and the assumptions and methodology used (Rosenman et al., 2006; Boden
and Ozonoff, 2008). In response to increased attention around this
topic at the time, BLS funded additional research to examine the extent
of underestimation in SOII and potential reasons (Wiatrowski, 2014).
One of these studies involved linking multiple data sources (i.e., not
just SOII and workers' compensation) for cases of amputation and carpal
tunnel syndrome (Joe et al., 2014). The authors found that the State-
based surveillance systems included 5 times and 10 times more cases
than BLS SOII, respectively.
Another study conducted as part of this broader effort estimated
that approximately 30% of all workers' compensation claims in
Washington between 2003-2011 were not captured in BLS SOII (Wuellner et
al., 2016). This included sectors with higher rates of heat-related
injuries and illnesses, such as Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and
Hunting (28% of cases uncaptured) and Construction (28% uncaptured)
(Wuellner et al., 2016, Table III). The rate of underreporting was
particularly high for large construction firms (Wuellner et al., 2016,
Table IV).
In response to the studies on SOII undercount, BLS authors have
argued that differences in the inclusion criteria, scope, and purpose
between BLS SOII and workers' compensation explain some of differences
in the estimates and complicate the interpretations of the linkage-
based studies (Ruser, 2008; Wiatrowski, 2014). SOII estimates OSHA-
recordable injuries and illnesses each year and provides detailed case
and demographic information (e.g., nature of injury) for a specific
subset of the more severe cases (e.g., those involving days away from
work). This scope (OSHA-recordable injuries and illnesses) inherently
limits the ability for SOII to be used to estimate all occupational
injuries and illnesses. Additionally, injuries and illnesses involving
days away from work represent a limited percentage of the total
injuries and illnesses reported to BLS. In 2022, these cases were 42%
of total recordable cases, suggesting the case counts for HRIs in SOII
could be missing up to 58% of all OSHA-recordable HRIs (i.e., those not
involving days away from work) (https://www.bls.gov/iif/latest-numbers.htm).
The injury and illness data that employers report to BLS come from
the employer's OSHA Form 300 Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses
and OSHA Form 301 Injury and Illness Incident Report, so information on
the quality of the data in these forms is relevant for understanding
limitations of SOII. Through the Recordkeeping National Emphasis
Program (NEP) from 2009-2012, OSHA found that almost half (47%) of
establishments inspected by the agency had unrecorded and/or under-
recorded cases, which were more common at establishments that
[[Page 70741]]
originally reported low rates (Fagan and Hodgson, 2017). Several
factors contributed to the under-recording and unrecording cases.
First, in conducting thousands of interviews, the authors found that
workers do not always report injuries to their employers because of
fear of retaliation or disciplinary action. Second, some employers used
on-site medical units, which the authors explained could contribute to
underreporting (e.g., if these units were used to provide first aid
when additional medical care, which would have warranted reporting on
OSHA forms, should have been provided).
Employers rely on workers to report injuries and illnesses that may
otherwise be unobserved, but workers have multiple reasons to not do
so. In addition to Fagan and Hodgson 2017, multiple studies have
interviewed or surveyed workers on this topic. A recent systematic
review of 20 studies found that 20-74% of workers--which included
cleaning staff, carpenters, construction workers, and healthcare
workers--did not report injuries or illnesses to management (Kyung et
al., 2023). Some of the researchers asked workers about the barriers to
reporting, which included fear, a lack of knowledge on the reporting
process, and considering the injury to be a part of the job or not
serious.
Finally, employers are disincentivized from reporting injuries and
illnesses on their OSHA logs. Disincentives for reporting include
workers' compensation premiums being tied to injury and illness rates,
competition for contracts involving safety records, and a perception
that reporting will increase the probability of being inspected by OSHA
(GAO, 2009).
In interviews with employers selected to respond to SOII,
researchers found that 42% of them were not maintaining a log (Wuellner
and Phipps, 2018). In the same study, researchers found evidence to
suggest that misunderstandings about the reporting requirements would
likely lead to employers underreporting cases involving days away from
work. A similar study conducted among SOII respondents in Washington
State found that 12% weren't maintaining a log and 90% weren't
complying with some aspect of OSHA's recordkeeping requirements
(Wuellner and Bonauto, 2014).
While the general underreporting articles described here are not
specific to heat, Heinzerling et al. 2020 examined rates of heat-
related injuries and illnesses among workers in California and found
that California's workers' compensation database, WCIS, had 3-6 times
the number of heat-related cases between 2009-2017 than the official
BLS SOII estimates for California for each year in that period
(Heinzerling et al., 2020). Part of the reason for this discrepancy
could be the difference in inclusion criteria between the two datasets,
however, it is still a useful estimate for contextualizing the
potential magnitude of underreporting of heat-related cases when using
only SOII. While outside the U.S., a recent survey of 51 Canadian
health and safety professionals in the mining industry found that 71%
of respondents believed HRIs were underreported (Tetzlaff et al.,
2024).
II. Workers' Compensation
While workers' compensation data may capture injury and illness
cases not included in BLS SOII, the data are not available for the
entire U.S., as insurance coverage and reporting requirements vary
across States, and most States do not have single-payer systems.
Therefore, the majority of claims data are compiled by various insurers
and not within a single database. Even when the data are available for
an entire State, it is generally presumed that not all worker injuries
and illnesses are captured in these data, in part because of
eligibility criteria and in part because of underutilization of
workers' compensation for reimbursement of work-related medical
expenses.
Multiple papers have examined the extent to which and reasons why
workers don't always use workers' compensation insurance to pay for
work-related medical expenses and other reimbursable expenses. Some
reasons workers have reported for not filing workers' compensation
claims include fear, a lack of knowledge, ``too much trouble'' or
effort, and considering the injury to be a part of the job or not
serious (Kyung et al., 2023; Scherzer et al., 2005). Using the
Washington State Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a
telephone survey, Fan et al. (2006) found that 52% of the respondents
in 2002 reporting a work-related injury or illness filed a workers'
compensation claim. Using similar methodology across 10 States, Bonauto
et al. (2010) found that among respondents who reported a work-related
injury, there was a wide range in the proportion who reported having
their treatment paid for by workers' compensation by State--47% in
Texas to 77% in Kentucky (with a median of 61%). A study from 2013
estimated that 40% of work-related ED visits were paid for by a source
other than workers' compensation (Groenewold and Baron, 2013). Worker
race, geography, and having an illness rather than an injury were all
predictors of whether workers' compensation was the expected payer.
There are a few papers that suggest this phenomenon is occurring
for heat-related outcomes. Harduar Morano et al. 2015 (described above
in Section V.A.II., Reported Annual Incidence of Nonfatal Occupational
Heat-Related Injuries and Illnesses) found that across several
southeastern States, workers' compensation as expected primary payer
alone captured 60% of all emergency department visits and inpatient
hospitalizations, which varied by State (50-80% for emergency
department visits and 38-84% for inpatient hospitalizations) (Harduar
Morano et al., 2015). Similarly, in the 2011 report by the Florida
Department of Health (described above in Section V.A.II., Reported
Annual Incidence of Nonfatal Occupational Heat-Related Injuries and
Illnesses), 83% of claims identified were captured by workers'
compensation as primary payer (Florida DOH, 2011). It should be noted
that these percentages are influenced by the total number of captured
cases and in both sources the authors presume that they did not capture
all relevant cases.
III. Hospital Discharge Data
Hospital discharge data are the only surveillance data presented in
this risk assessment for which work-relatedness is not an inclusion
criterion; therefore, researchers relying on this data need to take an
additional step to assess work-relatedness for each case that
introduces the possibility that work-related cases are not recognized
as such and are thus excluded. Researchers identifying work-related
cases typically use a combination of workers' compensation as the
primary payer or ICD codes for external cause of injury. As discussed
in the previous section, workers' compensation is not always used by
workers, so relying on this variable will lead to undercounting. For
external cause of injury codes (e.g., E900.9 Excessive heat of
unspecified origin), researchers have found that these are not always
present or accurate for work-related injury cases (Hunt et al., 2007),
which isn't unexpected given that they aren't required for
reimbursement. For instance, codes indicating the location of
occurrence were present in 43% of probable work-related injury cases
the authors reviewed (Hunt et al., 2007). Harduar Morano and Watkins
(2017) used external cause of injury codes to identify work-related
emergency department visits and hospitalizations for heat-related
illnesses in Florida. They found that 2.8% of emergency
[[Page 70742]]
department visits, 1.2% of hospitalizations, and 0% of deaths were
identified solely by an external cause of injury code for work.
Both workers' compensation claims and hospitalization data are also
affected by the accuracy of diagnostic codes for identifying heat-
related cases. While the use of ICD codes for surveillance of heat-
related deaths, illnesses, and injuries is widely accepted, it is not
infallible, as these codes are designed for billing rather than
surveillance. The use of specific codes is up to the discretion of
healthcare providers, so practices may vary by provider and facility.
Healthcare providers may not always recognize that a patient's symptoms
are heat-related and thus, they may not record a heat-specific ICD
code. For example, a patient who presents to the emergency room after
fainting would likely be diagnosed with ``syncope'' (the medical term
for fainting). If the provider is aware that the patient fainted due to
heat exposure, they should record a heat-specific ICD-10 code, T67.1
Heat syncope. However, if the provider is unaware that the patient
fainted due to heat exposure (or otherwise fails to recognize the
connection between the two), they may record a non-heat-specific ICD-10
code, R55 Syncope and collapse. Researchers suspect underreporting when
ICD codes are used for surveillance of HRIs (Harduar Morano and
Watkins, 2017) and recommend researchers use all possible fields
available (e.g., primary diagnosis, secondary diagnosis, underlying
cause of death, contributing cause of death).
Researchers examining trends in heat-related illnesses using
electronic health records for the Veterans Health Administration
identified a dramatic increase in cases when ICD-10 was adopted,
suggesting that the coding scheme in ICD-9 may have led to systematic
underreporting of heat-related cases, at least for this population
(Osborne et al., 2023). The authors also note that 8.4% of the HRI
cases they identified were captured using unstructured fields (e.g.,
chief complaint, reason for admission) and not ICD codes.
Not all sick and injured workers go to an emergency department or
hospital and those that do are likely to be more severe cases.
Unfortunately, estimating the proportion of injured and sick workers
who do go to the hospital or emergency room is difficult, given a lack
of data on this topic. In a 1998 CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report written by NIOSH safety researchers, the authors reported an
analysis of unpublished data from the 1988 National Health Interview
Survey (NHIS) Occupational Health Supplement which found that 34% of
all occupational injuries were first treated in hospital emergency
departments, 34% in doctors' offices/clinics, 14% in work site health
clinics, and 9% in walk-in clinics (NIOSH DSR 1998). 1988 was the last
year that NIOSH asked that question in the NHIS.
Care-seeking for workers experiencing heat-related symptoms
specifically may be low. In a study evaluating post-deployment survey
response data among a subset of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill
responders (U.S. Coast Guard), Erickson et al. found that less than 1%
of respondents reported seeking medical treatment for heat-related
illness, yet 12% reported experiencing any heat-related symptoms
(Erickson et al., 2019).
IV. BLS CFOI
CFOI is well-regarded as the most complete and authoritative source
on fatal workplace injuries. However, the approach used to classify the
event and nature codes by BLS is not immune to misclassification of
heat-related deaths. BLS relies on death certificates, OSHA fatality
reports, news articles, and coroner reports (among other sources) to
determine the primary or contributing causes of death. The criteria for
defining a heat-related death or illness can vary by State, and among
physicians, medical examiners, and coroners. Additionally, individuals
who fill out death certificates are not necessarily equipped to make
these distinctions or confident in their accuracy (Wexelman, 2013).
Depending on State policies, individuals performing this role may be a
medical professional or an elected official with limited or no
medically relevant experience (National Research Council, 2009; CDC,
2023).
Researchers estimating fatality rates attributable to heat in the
overall U.S. population using historical temperature records have
produced much higher counts than approaches solely using death
certificates (Weinberger et al., 2020). While outside the U.S., a
recent study examining causes of death among migrant Nepali workers in
Qatar from 2009-2017 demonstrated that deaths coded as cardiovascular-
related (e.g., ``cardiac arrest'') among these mostly young workers
were unexpectedly common and correlated with higher wet bulb globe
temperatures, suggesting that these deaths may have been heat-related
but not coded as such (Pradhan et al., 2019). Heat-related deaths are
uniquely hard to identify if the medical professional didn't witness
the events preceding the death, particularly because heat can
exacerbate an existing medical condition, acting as a contributing
factor (Luber et al., 2006).
C. Summary
In conclusion, the available evidence indicates that the existing
surveillance data vastly undercount cases of heat-related injuries and
illnesses among workers. OSHA additionally believes that the inclusion
of unexposed worker-time in the denominator for incidence estimates
underestimates the true risk among heat-exposed workers.
V. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests information and comments on the following questions
and requests that stakeholders provide any relevant data, information,
or additional studies (or citations) supporting their view, and explain
the reasoning for including such studies:
Are there additional data or studies OSHA should consider
regarding the annual incidence of HRIs and heat-related fatalities
among workers?
OSHA has identified data from cohort-based and time series
studies that would suggest higher incidence rates than data from
surveillance datasets (e.g., BLS SOII, workers' compensation claims).
Are there other data from cohort-based or time series studies that OSHA
should rely on for determining risk of HRIs to heat-exposed workers?
Are employers aware of occupational HRIs that are not
reported through BLS SOII, workers' compensation claims, or hospital
discharge data? How commonly do HRIs occur that are not recorded on
OSHA 300 logs?
Are there additional data or studies that OSHA should
consider regarding the extent of underreporting and underestimating of
HRIs or heat-related fatalities?
B. Basis for Initial and High Heat Triggers
I. Introduction
In this section, OSHA presents the evidence that forms the basis of
the heat triggers contained in the proposed standard. These triggers
are based on the heat index and wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT). The
WBGT triggers are based on NIOSH exposure limits (i.e., the REL and
RAL), which are supported by empirical evidence dating back to the
1960s and have been found to be highly sensitive in capturing
unsustainable heat exposures.
Although there are no consensus-based heat index exposure limits
for workers, the question of which heat
[[Page 70743]]
index values represent a highly sensitive and appropriate screening
threshold for heat stress controls in the workplace has been evaluated
in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. The evidence described
below provides information on the sensitivity of alternative heat index
values, that is, the degree to which a particular heat index value can
be used to screen for potential risk of heat-related injuries and
illnesses (HRIs) and fatalities. OSHA looked at both experimental and
observational evidence, including efforts to derive more accessible and
easily understood heat index-based triggers from WBGT-based exposure
limits, to preliminarily determine appropriate heat index values for
triggering heat stress control measures. Each of these evidence streams
has strengths and limitations in informing this question.
Relevant experimental evidence in the physiology literature is
often conducted in controlled laboratory settings among healthy, young
volunteers, but the conditions may not always mimic conditions
experienced by workers (e.g., workers often experience multiple days in
a row of working in high temperatures). Observational evidence does not
have this limitation because the data are collected among actual
workers in real-world settings. However, observational evidence is
potentially affected by exposure misclassification since exposure
metrics are often derived from local weather stations and rely on
maximum daily values. Experimental data does not have this limitation,
since the laboratory conditions are highly controlled, including the
exposure levels.
OSHA used both streams of evidence to support proposing an initial
heat trigger of 80 [deg]F (heat index) and a high heat trigger of 90
[deg]F (heat index). The observational evidence that OSHA identified
suggests that the vast majority of known occupational heat-related
fatalities occur above the initial heat index trigger, making it a
sensitive trigger for heat-related fatalities. The vast majority of
nonfatal occupational HRIs also occur above this trigger. The
experimental evidence (specifically the WBGT-based exposure limits)
also suggests that when there is high radiant heat, a heat index of 90
[deg]F would be an appropriate time to institute additional controls
(e.g., mandatory rest breaks). This is supported by observational
evidence that shows a rapidly declining sensitivity above a heat index
of 90 [deg]F. OSHA has preliminarily concluded that the experimental
evidence also supports the selection of these triggers as highly
sensitive and therefore protective.
II. Observational Evidence
To determine an appropriate initial heat trigger, OSHA sought to
identify a highly sensitive screening level above which the majority of
fatal and nonfatal HRIs occur. This could presumably be used to
identify the environmental conditions for which engineering and
administrative controls would be most important to prevent HRIs from
occurring. One challenge for determining this trigger level is that
many factors influence an individual's risk of developing an HRI. In
addition to workload, PPE, and acclimatization status, the risk of
developing an HRI is also influenced by workers' abilities to self-pace
at their jobs as well as whether there had been exposure to hot
conditions on the prior day(s). There are also medications and
comorbidities that may increase workers' risk of HRIs (see discussion
in Section IV.O., Factors that Affect Risk for Heat-Related Health
Effects).
The observational studies reviewed by OSHA used retrospective
temperature and humidity data matched to the locations where HRIs and
fatalities occurred over a period of time. Although these studies did
not account specifically for workload, PPE use, acclimatization status,
or other relevant factors, the HRI cases studied included worker
populations where these factors were likely present to varying degrees.
Therefore, OSHA has preliminarily determined that retrospective
observational data collected among workers who have experienced fatal
or nonfatal HRIs on the job is valuable to informing a screening level
that reflects the presence of these multiple risk factors among worker
populations. These studies are summarized in the following sections.
A. Fatalities
In a doctoral dissertation from 2015, Gubernot matched historic
weather data to the heat-related fatalities reported in BLS CFOI
(fatality data described in Section V.A., Risk Assessment) between
2000-2010 (Gubernot, 2015). Gubernot used historic, weather monitor-
based temperature and dew point measurements from the National Climatic
Data Center to recreate the heat index (using daily maximum temperature
and daily average dew point) on the day of each fatality. If there was
not already a monitor in the county where a fatality occurred, then the
next closest weather monitor to that county was used. Of the 327
fatalities identified as being related to ambient heat exposure (i.e.,
cases with secondary heat sources, like ovens, were excluded), 96.3%
occurred on a day with a calculated heat index above 80 [deg]F and
86.9% occurred on a day above 90 [deg]F. Using a higher threshold such
as a heat index of 95 [deg]F would have only captured approximately 71%
of fatalities (estimated from Figure 4-2 of the study). The author also
evaluated how many cases occurred on a day when a National Weather
Service (NWS)-defined excessive heat event (EHE) was declared. In a
directive to field offices, the NWS outlines when offices should issue
excessive heat warnings--when there will be 2 or more days that meet or
exceed a heat index of 105 [deg]F for the Northern U.S. and 110 [deg]F
for the Southern U.S., with temperatures not falling below 75 [deg]F
(although local offices are allowed to use their own criteria) (NWS,
2024a). Gubernot appears to have used a simpler criterion to evaluate
the sensitivity of these EHEs--whether the heat index on the day of the
fatality was at or above 105 [deg]F for northern States and at or above
110 [deg]F for southern States. Only 42 fatalities (12.8%) occurred on
days meeting the EHE definitions, suggesting EHEs are not a sensitive
trigger for occupational heat-related fatalities. During the SBREFA
process, small entity representatives suggested that OSHA consider the
NWS EHE definitions as options for the initial and/or high heat
triggers, but based on these findings (and those reported in other
studies summarized in this section), OSHA has preliminarily determined
that these criteria are not sensitive enough and would not adequately
protect workers.
Some limitations of this analysis include the use of nearest-
monitor exposure assignment, as well as the use of maximum temperature
with average dew point to calculate heat index, both of which may
introduce exposure misclassification. Although the author did not refer
to the latter as a daily maximum heat index, this estimate would most
closely approximate that value, which would suggest that workers were
likely exposed to heat index values below that level during the work
shift leading up to the fatality.
In a meta-analysis published in 2020, Maung and Tustin (both
affiliated with OSHA at the time) conducted a systematic review of
studies, such as the one described above by Gubernot, where researchers
retrospectively assigned heat exposure estimates to occupational heat-
related fatalities (Maung and Tustin, 2020). The purpose of their meta-
analysis was to identify a heat index threshold below which
occupational heat-related fatalities do not occur (i.e., a highly
sensitive
[[Page 70744]]
threshold). Maung and Tustin identified 418 heat-related fatalities
among civilian workers across 8 studies. Approximately three quarters
of these civilian fatalities (n=327; 78%) came from Gubernot 2015. The
authors found a heat index threshold of 80 [deg]F to be highly
sensitive for civilian workers--96% of fatalities (402 of 418) occurred
on days with a heat index estimate at or above this level. A heat index
threshold of 90 [deg]F had slightly lower sensitivity--approximately
86% (estimated from table 1 and figure 3 of their study). Similar to
the findings reported in Gubernot 2015, one of the NWS thresholds for
issuing heat advisories (heat index of 105 [deg]F) did not appear to be
a sensitive trigger, missing 68% of civilian worker fatalities.
The limitations for Gubernot 2015 apply to this analysis as well.
These analyses (including the data from Gubernot, 2015) were limited to
outdoor workers, potentially limiting the generalizability of the
findings. This analysis also relied on single values (e.g., daily
maximum heat index) to capture exposure across a work shift. As pointed
out by Maung and Tustin, it is important to consider that exposure
characterizations using daily maximum heat index likely over-estimates
the exposures that workers experience throughout the shift leading to
the fatality. For example, a fatality occurring on a day with a daily
maximum heat index of 90 [deg]F likely involved prolonged exposure to
heat index values in the 80s [deg]F.
In 2019, a group of OSHA researchers published a similar analysis
for both fatal and nonfatal HRIs reported to OSHA in 2016 among outdoor
workers (Morris CE et al., 2019). They identified 17 fatalities in this
subset and used nearest weather station data to estimate daily maximum
heat index on the day of the fatality. All 17 fatalities occurred on a
day with a daily maximum heat index of at least 80 [deg]F (the lowest
was at 88 [deg]F). A daily maximum heat index of 90 [deg]F had a
sensitivity of approximately 94%, while 100 [deg]F had a sensitivity of
approximately 35%. A major limitation with this analysis is its small
sample size (n=17 fatalities).
B. Non-Fatalities
Morris et al., identified 217 nonfatal HRIs among outdoor workers
reported to OSHA in 2016 (Morris CE et al., 2019). They found that 99%
of these cases happened on a day with a daily maximum heat index of at
least 80 [deg]F. There is a steep decline in sensitivity for daily
maximum heat index values in the 90s [deg]F--89% for 90 [deg]F but
approximately 58% for 100 [deg]F (estimated from Figure 5 of the study
which combines fatal and nonfatal cases)--suggesting that many nonfatal
HRIs occur on days when the heat index does not reach 100 [deg]F. One
limitation of this dataset is potential selection bias, because the
dataset only included cases that were reported to OSHA. This study
therefore did not include cases in State Plan States.
A much larger analysis conducted among emergency department (ED)
visits in the Southeastern U.S. was published by Shire et al. (Shire et
al., 2020). The authors identified 5,017 hyperthermia-related ED visits
among workers in 5 southeastern States (Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Louisiana, and Tennessee) between May and September in 2010-2012. While
the previously described studies used nearest monitor data, Shire et
al. used data from the North American Land Data Assimilation System
(NLDAS), which incorporates both observation and modeled data to fill
in gaps between locations of monitors, providing data at a higher
geographic resolution (0.125[deg] grid). Since the authors only had ED
visit data at the county level, they used the NLDAS data to compute
population-weighted, county-level estimates of daily maximum heat index
using all the grids within each county. They found that approximately
99% of ED visits occurred on days with a daily maximum heat index of at
least 80 [deg]F and about 95% of cases on days with a maximum heat
index of at least 90 [deg]F. Approximately 54% of cases occurred on
days with a daily maximum heat index of 103 [deg]F or higher. This
further supports the finding from Morris et al. (2019) that sensitivity
declines steeply above a heat index of 90 [deg]F. One limitation of
this analysis is the use of the emergency department location as the
basis for the exposure assignment, which has the potential to introduce
exposure misclassification if workers were working far away from the ED
facility.
In a 2016 doctoral dissertation, Harduar Morano conducted a
retrospective analysis of 3,394 heat-related hospitalizations and ED
visits among Florida workers in May-October between 2005-2012, using
data from the weather monitor nearest to the zip codes where the
hospitalizations and ED visits occurred to characterize heat exposure
(Harduar Morano, 2016). The vast majority of cases occurred on a day
with a daily maximum heat index of at least 80 [deg]F, with
approximately 91% of cases occurring on a day with a maximum heat index
of at least 90 [deg]F (estimated from Figure 6-4). There was also a 13%
increase in the HRI hospitalization and ED visit rate for every 1
[deg]F increase in heat index at values below 99 [deg]F (Figure 6-4,
Lag 0 plot of the study), suggesting that potential triggers in the
mid-to-high 90's would increasingly miss many cases. One limitation of
this analysis and that conducted by Shire et al. is that
hospitalization and ED visit data did not include enough information to
distinguish between indoor vs outdoor workers; it is possible that
indoor workers could have been exposed to conditions not captured by
the weather data (such as working near hot industrial processes).
In addition, four studies of workers' compensation data in
Washington State--three of which were reported in Section V.A., Risk
Assessment--have examined maximum temperature or heat index on the days
of reported HRIs (Bonauto et al., 2007; Spector et al., 2014; Hesketh
et al., 2020; Spector et al., 2023). Hesketh et al., 2020 (an update on
Bonauto et al., 2007) matched weather data to addresses for the HRI
claims in the State's workers' compensation database between 2006 and
2017 (Hesketh et al., 2020). They found that, of the 905 claims for
which they had temperature data, over 75% of HRIs occurred on days with
a maximum temperature of at least 80 [deg]F and approximately 50% of
claims occurred on days with a maximum temperature of at least 90
[deg]F (estimated from Figure 2). They also reported that approximately
75% of claim cases occurred when the hourly maximum temperature was at
least approximately 79 [deg]F. This paper is part of the rationale for
Washington State lowering the trigger level in its heat-specific
standard from 89 [deg]F to 80 [deg]F--the old trigger of 89 [deg]F had
missed 45% of cases in this dataset (Washington Dept. of Labor &
Industries, 2023). A similar study published in 2023 expanded the
dataset used by Hesketh et al. to include HRI claims from 2006 to 2021
(n=1,241) (Spector et al., 2023). The authors used gridded
meteorological data from the PRISM Climate Group at Oregon State
University and geocoded accident location (or business location or
provider location if accident location was unable to be used) to
determine the maximum temperature on the day of the event. They found
that 76% of HRI claims occurred on a day with a maximum temperature of
at least 80 [deg]F (this increased to 79% when restricted to cases that
were ``definitely'' or ``probably'' outdoors). A major limitation of
these studies is the use of ambient temperature, limiting the ability
to compare findings to other papers that relied on the heat index. In
[[Page 70745]]
Spector et al. 2014, the authors calculated the daily maximum heat
index for each county with an HRI in their dataset on the date of
injury (Spector et al., 2014). They obtained the county of injury and,
when not available, imputed the location of the injury rather than
using the employer address, which is assumed to be more accurate for
characterizing exposure. In their analysis of 45 agriculture and
forestry worker HRI claims between 1995-2009 that had corresponding
weather data, Spector et al. found that 75% of HRI claims occurred on
days when the maximum heat index was at least 90 [deg]F, whereas only
50% occurred on days when it was at least 99 [deg]F and 25% for 106
[deg]F.
C. Summary
In summary, researchers have identified a heat index of 80 [deg]F
as a highly sensitive trigger for heat-related fatalities (capturing
96-100% of fatalities) and nonfatalities (99-100%) among workers
(excluding results from Washington State). When looking at ambient
temperature, researchers in Washington found that 75-76% of HRI claims
occurred on a day with a maximum ambient temperature of 80 [deg]F or
greater. Multiple studies additionally identified a rapidly declining
sensitivity above a heat index of 90 [deg]F, suggesting that additional
protective measures (e.g., observation for signs and symptoms of HRIs)
are needed once the heat index reaches approximately 90 [deg]F.
One of the common limitations of the analyses presented in this
section is the use of a single reading (e.g., daily maximum heat index)
to capture each affected worker's exposure on the day of the event. In
reality, conditions fluctuate throughout the day, so relying on maximum
measures would likely overestimate heat exposure across the workday.
The use of nearest monitor weather data is also likely to lead to
exposure misclassification. The inclusion of indoor workers in some of
the studies is also a limitation, since the exposure for those workers
could be very different (e.g., if there is process heat). In Spector et
al. 2023, the authors noted an increase in the percent of cases
occurring on days with a maximum temperature of 80 [deg]F when
restricting to cases that definitely or probably occurred outdoors. In
all these studies, researchers can only examine conditions for the
cases that were captured in the surveillance systems. There could be a
bias such that cases occurring on hotter days were more likely to have
been coded as heat-related and included in these databases. Failure to
ascertain HRI cases occurring at lower heat indices could have skewed
the findings upwards, making it appear that hotter thresholds were more
sensitive than they actually were. Finally, the use of heat index (or
ambient temperature) ignores the impacts of air movement as well as
radiant heat, which can substantially increase the heat stress a worker
is exposed to and increase the risk of an HRI.
III. Experimental Evidence
NIOSH has published exposure limits based on WBGT in its Criteria
for a Recommended Standard going back multiple decades.\3\ These
exposure limits--the REL and RAL--account for the contributions of wind
velocity and solar irradiance, in addition to ambient temperature and
humidity. (ACGIH has published similar exposure limits--the TLV and
AL.) In addition to WBGT, NIOSH and ACGIH heat stress guidelines
require the user to account for metabolic heat production (through the
estimation of workload) and the contributions of PPE and clothing. The
user adds an adjustment factor to the measured WBGT to account for the
specific clothing or PPE worn (specifically those ensembles that impair
heat loss) and uses a formula based on workload to estimate the
exposure limit. They then compare the measured (or adjusted, if using a
clothing adjustment factor) WBGT to the calculated exposure limit to
determine if the limit is exceeded. Work-rest schedules with increasing
time spent on break can further increase the exposure limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ NIOSH plays an important role in carrying out the purpose of
the OSH Act, including developing and establishing recommended
occupational safety and health standards (29 U.S.C. 671).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These exposure limits and guidelines are based in empirical
evidence, such as laboratory-based trials conducted in the 1960s and
1970s. This basis for WBGT exposure limits is described in detail by
both NIOSH and ACGIH (NIOSH, 2016; ACGIH, 2017). These exposure limits
have been tested and found to be highly sensitive (100%) in modern
laboratory conditions in capturing unsustainable heat exposures (i.e.,
when a steady increase in core temperature is observed) (Garzon-
Villalba et al., 2017). Among workers in real-world settings, these
WBGT-based exposure limits have been found to be highly sensitive for
fatal outcomes (100% in one study; 92-100% in another) and, although
slightly less so, still sensitive for nonfatal outcomes (73% in one
study; 88-97% in another); however, these studies are limited by their
small sample size and retrospective characterization of workload,
acclimatization status, and clothing/PPE use (which are required for
accurately estimating WBGT-based exposure limits) (Tustin et al.,
2018b; Morris CE et al., 2019).
Two papers have attempted to apply the concepts of the WBGT-based
exposure limits to the more easily accessible and understood heat index
metric. Based on the relationship between WBGT and heat index, Bernard
and Iheanacho developed a screening tool that reflects heat stress risk
based on heat index and workload category--light (180 W), moderate (300
W), and heavy (415 W)--using assumptions about radiant heat but
ignoring the contributions of wind and clothing (Bernard and Iheanacho,
2015). To do this, they created a model predicting WBGT from the heat
index. From this model, WBGT estimates were produced within a 1 [deg]C
range for heat index values of 100 [deg]F or more but the model was
less accurate at heat index values below 100 [deg]F. Using their
reported screening table, which allows the user to adjust for low vs
high radiant heat, an acclimatized worker performing a heavy (415 W)
workload in high radiant heat outdoors would be above the WBGT-based
exposure limit and in need of a break at a heat index of 90 [deg]F. The
same worker, if unacclimatized, would be above the exposure limit at a
heat index of 80 [deg]F. These findings support the provision of 15-
minute breaks at a heat index of 90 [deg]F in OSHA's proposed standard,
as well as the provision requiring these breaks for unacclimatized
workers at a heat index of 80 [deg]F (unless the employer is following
the gradual acclimatization schedule and providing breaks if needed).
The authors noted that high radiant heat indoors could require even
greater adjustments to the heat index. As further evidence for the need
to adjust these values for radiant heat exposure, Morris et al. (2019)
reported that for the days on which HRIs occurred in their dataset,
cloud cover was often minimal suggesting there was exposure to high
radiant heat when the HRIs occurred.
More recently, Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al. used an experimental
approach to derive workload-based HI heat stress thresholds
(Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al., 2019). The researchers used data from
two progressive heat stress studies of 29 acclimatized individuals.
Participants were assigned different work rates and wore different
clothing throughout the trials, serving as their own controls. Once
thermal equilibrium was established, the ambient temperature was
increased in five-minute intervals while holding relative humidity
[[Page 70746]]
constant. The critical condition defined for each subject was the
condition at which there was a transition from a stable core body
temperature to an increasing core body temperature (i.e., the point at
which heat exposure became unsustainable). Using the results from these
trials, the authors established an equation deriving a heat index
exposure limit (equivalent to the TLV or REL) at different metabolic
rates for a worker wearing woven clothing:
HI benchmark ([deg]C) = 49-0.026 M
Where M is workload in Watts.
Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al. assessed the effectiveness of the
proposed heat index thresholds for predicting unsustainable heat stress
by using receiver operating characteristic curves and area-under-the-
curve (AUC) values to determine predictive power (this technique is
commonly used to evaluate the predictive power of diagnostic tests).
The AUC value for the proposed heat index thresholds with subjects
wearing woven clothing was 0.86, which is similar to that of the WBGT-
based thresholds, based on the authors' prior analysis (Garz[oacute]n-
Villalba et al., 2017). This result showed that the heat index
thresholds derived by Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al. (2019) would
reasonably identify unsustainable heat exposure conditions.
Compared to the heat index thresholds proposed by Bernard and
Iheanacho (2015), the heat index thresholds proposed by Garz[oacute]n-
Villalba et al. are the same at low metabolic rates (111 [deg]F for 180
W) but higher at higher metabolic rates: 105.8 [deg]F versus 100 [deg]F
at 300 W and 100.4 [deg]F versus 95 [deg]F at 415 W (Note: these values
are unadjusted for radiant heat). This is likely because the ACGIH
WBGT-based exposure limits, upon which Bernard and Iheanacho based
their heat index thresholds, are intentionally more conservative at
higher metabolic rates, whereas Garz[oacute]n-Villalba used a less
conservative linear model to derive their heat index thresholds
(Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al., 2019). When adding an adjustment for
full sunshine provided by the authors, the proposed heat index-based
exposure limit derived from the Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al. (2019)
equation for a worker performing a very heavy workload (450 W) is 92.8
[deg]F.
Thus, laboratory-derived heat index thresholds for unsustainable
heat exposure are higher than heat index thresholds shown in
observational studies to be sensitive for predicting the occurrence of
HRIs. There are several reasons that may explain why values determined
to be sensitive in laboratory settings are higher than those reported
among workers in real-world settings. For one, volunteers in laboratory
studies are often young, healthy, and euhydrated (i.e., beginning the
trial adequately hydrated). They are also not exposed to consecutive
days of heat exposure for eight-hour or longer work shifts. Working in
hot conditions on the prior day has been demonstrated in the literature
to be a risk factor for HRIs, even among acclimatized individuals
(Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al., 2016; Wallace et al., 2005). Therefore,
the use of volunteers and exposure conditions in laboratory-based
trials may not always provide good proxies for workers and the
environments in which they work. There is also significant inter-
individual variability in heat stress tolerance, which may mean trial
studies with few participants might not capture the full range of heat
susceptibilities faced by workers.
In summary, long-established and empirically validated occupational
exposure limits exist for WBGT. In observational studies, WBGT exposure
limits have been found to be highly sensitive for detecting fatal HRIs
among workers and, although slightly less so, still sensitive for
nonfatal outcomes (although these studies are limited by small sample
size and retrospective work characterization). Research efforts to
crosswalk the WBGT-based exposure limits to the more accessible heat
index metric have demonstrated that a heat index of 90-92.8 [deg]F
would represent an appropriate trigger for controls such as mandatory
rest breaks for acclimatized workers performing heavy or very heavy
workloads in high radiant heat conditions (Bernard and Iheanacho, 2015;
Garz[oacute]n-Villalba et al., 2019). For unacclimatized workers
performing heavy workloads in high radiant heat conditions, a heat
index trigger of 80 [deg]F would be in line with the WBGT-based
exposure limits (Bernard and Iheanacho, 2015). Although these two
studies suggest that higher triggers could reasonably be applied to
workers performing lighter workloads, the assumptions used may not
always apply to workers (e.g., no exposure to working in the heat the
prior day, healthy, euhydrated). This may explain, at least in part,
the discrepancy in findings between the observational and experimental
studies discussed in this section.
IV. State Standards and Non-Governmental Recommendations
In their heat-specific standards, summarized in the table below,
States use various initial and high heat triggers, some of which depend
on the clothing or gear worn by workers. OSHA's proposed triggers are
generally in line with those used by these States.
OSHA is proposing using the same initial heat trigger (heat index
of 80 [deg]F) as Oregon's existing standard and Maryland's proposed
standard (Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156 (2022); Or. Admin. R. 437-004-1131
(2022); Code of Maryland Regulations 09.12.32: Heat Stress Standards
(2024)). California and Colorado use an ambient temperature trigger of
80 [deg]F for outdoor work sites and agricultural sites, respectively,
as does the Washington standard for workers wearing breathable clothing
(Cal. Code of Regulations (CCR), tit. 8, section 3395 (2015); 7 Colo.
Code Regs. section 1103-15 (2022); Wash. Admin. Code sections 296-62-
095 through 296-62-09560; 296-307-097 through 296-307-09760 (2023)).
California's proposed indoor standard uses an ambient temperature
trigger of 82 [deg]F (CCR, tit. 8, section 3396 (2023)).
The high heat trigger that OSHA is proposing (heat index of 90
[deg]F) is the same as Oregon's existing standard and Maryland's
proposed standard. California and Colorado use an ambient temperature
high heat trigger of 95 [deg]F, while the Washington standard uses 90
[deg]F. The California indoor proposal uses an ambient temperature or
heat index trigger of 87 [deg]F to impose additional requirements.
Table V-2--Summary of Triggers Used in Various Heat-Specific Standards at the State Level
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Setting Initial heat trigger High heat trigger
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California........................... Outdoor................ 80 [deg]F (Ambient).... 95 [deg]F (Ambient).
Washington........................... Outdoor................ 80 [deg]F (Ambient) 90 [deg]F (Ambient).
(all other clothing)
52 [deg]F (non-
breathable clothes)..
California (proposal)................ Indoor................. 82 [deg]F (Ambient).... 87 [deg]F (Ambient or
Heat Index), except
for certain clothing
or in high radiant
heat (82 [deg]F).
Oregon............................... Indoor/Outdoor......... 80 [deg]F (Heat Index). 90 [deg]F (Heat Index).
Maryland (proposal).................. Indoor/Outdoor......... 80 [deg]F (Heat Index). 90 [deg]F (Heat Index).
[[Page 70747]]
Colorado............................. Indoor/Outdoor 80 [deg]F (Ambient).... 95 [deg]F (Ambient) or
Agriculture only. other conditions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: There are different provisions required at each trigger by each State.
In the Heat Stress and Strain chapter of their most recent TLV
booklet, ACGIH recommends establishing a heat stress management plan
when heat stress is suspected (ACGIH, 2023). One criterion they provide
for determining when heat stress may be present is whether the heat
index or air temperature is 80 [deg]F. In comments received from small
entity representatives during the SBREFA process and a public commenter
during the ACCSH meeting on April 24, 2024, OSHA heard feedback that
the agency should consider different triggers that vary by geography.
Neither the ACGIH TLV/REL nor NIOSH REL/RAL vary by geography; these
formulas are used globally. Additionally, California regulators, in
their existing outdoor heat standard and their proposed indoor heat
standard, use single State-wide triggers, despite the State
experiencing a wide range of microclimates (e.g., both desert and
coastal areas exist in the State). Such microclimates would make it
difficult to identify appropriate geographically specific triggers, as
factors like elevation and humidity can vary widely even within a
specific State or region. OSHA has also heard from stakeholders who
suggested that the triggers in a proposed rule should be presented
simply, which would be challenging if there were multiple triggers for
different parts of the country.
V. Summary
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily finds that the experimental and
observational evidence support that heat index triggers of 80 [deg]F
and 90 [deg]F are highly sensitive and therefore highly protective of
workers. These triggers are also generally in-line with current and
proposed triggers in State heat-specific standards. Therefore, OSHA is
proposing an initial heat trigger of heat index of 80 [deg]F and a high
heat trigger of heat index of 90 [deg]F. OSHA is also proposing to
permit employers to use the WBGT-based NIOSH RAL and REL, which are
supported by empirical evidence and have been found to be highly
sensitive in capturing unsustainable heat exposure.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether OSHA has adequately identified, documented, and
correctly interpreted all studies and other information relevant to its
conclusion about sensitive heat triggers;
Whether there are additional observational studies or data
that use more robust exposure metrics (e.g., more than daily maximum
heat index) to retrospectively assess occupational heat exposure on the
day of heat-related fatalities and nonfatal HRIs;
Whether OSHA should consider other values for the initial
and/or high heat trigger and if so, what evidence exists to support
those other values;
The appropriateness of using heat index to define the
initial and high heat triggers;
Whether OSHA should explicitly incorporate radiant heat
into the initial and/or high heat triggers, and if so, how;
Whether OSHA should explicitly incorporate clothing
adjustment factors into the initial and/or high heat triggers, and if
so, how;
Whether OSHA should use different triggers for different
parts of the country, and if so, how;
The appropriateness of applying the same triggers to
employers who conduct on-site measurements as opposed to employers who
use forecast data; and
Whether OSHA should consider an additional trigger
specific to heat waves or sudden increases in temperature and, if so,
whether there are definitions of heat waves that are simple and easy-
to-apply.
C. Risk Reduction
I. Introduction
OSHA identified and reviewed dozens of studies evaluating the
effectiveness of various controls designed to reduce the risk of heat-
related injuries and illnesses (HRIs). The studies captured include
observational and experimental studies that examined the effect of
either a single control or the combined effect of multiple controls.
These studies were conducted among civilian workers, athletes, military
personnel, and volunteers. Observational studies conducted outside the
U.S. were included if OSHA determined the work tasks to be comparable
to those of U.S.-based workers. OSHA also examined systematic review
articles that summarized the literature on various individual controls.
OSHA acknowledges that observational studies evaluating the
effectiveness of multi-pronged interventions or programs in reducing
HRI incidence in ``real-world'' occupational settings are the most
relevant for assessing the reduction in risk of the proposed rule.
However, OSHA identified very few of these studies in the literature
review and determined there to be some limitations in extrapolating
their findings to the proposed rule. Therefore, OSHA also examined
studies looking at the effectiveness of single interventions, many of
which were experimental in design.
One limitation of the experimental studies--often conducted in
laboratory settings--is that they were not conducted in ``real-world''
occupational settings. However, some of these studies were designed to
simulate actual work tasks and work environments, which increases the
generalizability for occupational settings (i.e., the extent that the
study results can be applied to employees exposed in the workplace).
Additionally, one advantage of experimental studies is that they can be
conducted under controlled conditions and are thus able to better
measure endpoints of interest and control for confounding variables.
Experimental studies are also sometimes able to examine situations in
which subjects experience high levels of heat strain because the close
physiological monitoring of subjects allows the study to be stopped
before the subject is at risk of heat stroke or death.
Although many of these studies evaluated measures of heat strain
(e.g., core body temperature, heart rate) rather than instances of
HRIs, OSHA believes that these metrics are important for understanding
risk of HRIs. As discussed in Section IV., Health Effects, these
metrics are intermediary endpoints on the path to HRIs (e.g., heat
stroke, heat exhaustion). The controls required in the proposed
standard are effective in that they reduce or slow the
[[Page 70748]]
accumulation of heat in the body, which in turn reduces the risk of
HRIs.
OSHA also examined and summarized systematic review articles that
reviewed and discussed the experimental literature. These articles were
written by prominent heat safety experts (in either an occupational or
athletic context) and were typically conducted using a consensus-type
approach. OSHA also looked outside the peer-reviewed literature for
consensus statements, reports, recommendations, and requirements from
governmental bodies and non-governmental organizations.
Despite the limitations noted above, the studies, review articles,
and non-peer reviewed sources presented in this section represent the
best available evidence OSHA has identified regarding the effectiveness
of controls designed to reduce the risk of HRIs. The following summary
of OSHA's findings demonstrates that the requirements of the proposed
rule will be effective in reducing the risk of HRIs among workers.
II. Evidence on the Effectiveness of Individual Control Measures
A. Systematic Reviews and Consensus Statements
Several publications have summarized the literature on the efficacy
of controls to reduce the risk of HRI in the form of review articles or
consensus statements. For example, Morris et al. (2020) assessed
systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original studies on heat-related
intervention strategies published in English prior to November 6, 2019,
that included studies conducted at ambient temperatures over 28 [deg]C
or among hypohydrated (i.e., fluid intake is less than water lost
through sweat) participants, used healthy adult participants, and
reported physiological outcomes (e.g., change in heart rate, core
temperature, thermal comfort) and/or physical or cognitive performance
outcomes. Most of the captured articles were from the exercise
literature, but 9 of the 36 systematic reviews (i.e., a detailed and
comprehensive reviews of relevant scientific studies and other
evidence) mentioned occupational exposure in various professions, such
as military personnel, firefighters, and emergency responders. A second
search identified 7 original studies that were not covered in the
systematic reviews. Based on their systematic review, the study authors
identified the following effective interventions: environmental
conditioning (e.g., fans, shade, air-conditioning); optimal clothing
(e.g., hats; loose fitting, light/brightly colored/reflective,
breathable, clothing; ventilation patches in PPE; cooling garments/
PPE); physiological adaptation (e.g., acclimatization, improving
physical fitness); pacing (e.g., reduced work intensity, breaks);
hydration and nutrition (e.g., hydration, electrolytes); and personal
cooling options (e.g., cold water ingestion, water immersion). They
also noted that ``a generally under investigated, yet likely effective
. . . intervention is to utilize pre-planned breaks in combination with
the cooling interventions mentioned above.'' Morris et al. (2020) also
noted that ``maintaining hydration is important for maintaining
cognitive and physical performance'' (Morris et al., 2020).
Morrissey et al. (2021b) assembled 51 experts with experience in
physiology, occupational health, and HRIs to review and summarize
current data and gaps in knowledge for eight heat safety topics to
develop consensus recommendations. The experts created a list of 40
heat safety recommendations within those eight topics that employers
could implement at their work site to protect workers and to avoid
productivity losses associated with occupational heat stress. These
recommendations for each of the eight topics included:
(1) Hydration: e.g., access and availability to cool, potable
water; training on hydration; addressing availability of fluids during
rest breaks in the prevention plan;
(2) Environmental monitoring: e.g., measurements as close to the
work site as possible; consideration of environmental conditions (e.g.,
temperature, humidity, wind speed, radiance), work demands, PPE, and
worker acclimatization status in assessing heat stress; including
environment-based work modifications (e.g., number of rest breaks) in a
prevention plan;
(3) Emergency procedures and plans: e.g., availability of an
emergency plan for each work site; identification of personnel to
create, manage, and implement the plan; making available, rehearsing,
and reviewing the plan annually;
(4) Body cooling: e.g., availability of rest/cooling/hydration
areas made accessible to workers as needed; cooling during rest breaks
(e.g., immersion, shade, hydration, PPE removal); use of fans (at
temperatures below 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F)) or air-conditioners; use of
portable cooling strategies (e.g., ice, water, ice towels) in areas
without electricity; use of cooling strategies before, during, and
after work; cooling PPE used under other PPE when PPE can't be removed;
(5) Acclimatization: e.g., creation and implementation of a 5-7 day
acclimatization plan; plans for both new and returning workers that are
tailored to factors such as environmental conditions and PPE; training
on benefits of acclimatization;
(6) Textiles/PPE: e.g., use of clothing/PPE that is thin,
lightweight, promotes heat dissipation, that fits properly, and
adequately protects against hazards; PPE with ventilated openings;
removal of PPE/extra layers during rest periods;
(7) Physiological monitoring: (e.g., checking heart rate/body
temperature); and
(8) Heat hygiene: e.g., annual training on heat related illness,
prevention, first aid, and emergency response in language and manner
that is easily understood; designated personnel or ``buddy approach to
monitor for symptoms''; communication strategies to inform employees of
heat mitigation strategies before the work shift, healthcare worker
using examination results (if examinations are required or recommended)
to educate employees.
Racinais et al. (2015) presented consensus recommendations to
reduce physiological heat strain and optimize sports performance in hot
conditions that were developed in roundtable discussions by a panel of
experts. While recommendations were focused on athletes, the study
authors noted that current knowledge on heat stress is mainly available
from military and occupational research, with information from sport
sciences available only more recently. The study authors recommended
three main interventions. The first recommendation, considered to be
most important by study authors, was acclimatization, involving
repeated training in heat for at least 60 minutes a day over a 1-2 week
period. The authors explained that acclimatization attenuates the
physiological strain of heat by improving cardiovascular stability and
electrolyte balance through an increase in sweat rate, skin blood flow,
and plasma volume. The second recommendation was drinking sufficient
fluids to maintain adequate hydration before and after exercise. Study
authors explain that sweating during exercise can lead to dehydration
which, if not mitigated by fluid intake, has the potential to
exacerbate cardiovascular strain and reduce the capacity to exercise in
the heat. The third recommendation was cooling methods to reduce heat
storage and physiological strain (e.g., fanning, iced garments/towels,
cold fluid intake, cooling vests, water immersion). Additional
recommendations for event organizers included planning for shaded
areas,
[[Page 70749]]
cooling and rehydration facilities, and longer recovery periods (i.e.,
break periods) for hydration and cooling.
B. Summary for Systematic Reviews and Consensus Statements
In conclusion, OSHA reviewed three sets of recommendations on
effective controls to prevent HRI developed by scientific experts
following extensive literature reviews. A number of the recommendations
were consistent with requirements or options in OSHA's proposed
standard. For example, all three groups of experts recommended
hydration, rest breaks, shade, cooling measures such as fans, and
acclimatization (Morris et al., 2020; Morrissey et al., 2021b; Racinais
et al., 2015). Two of the expert groups also recommended cooling
methods such as air conditioning (Morris et al., 2020; Morrissey et
al., 2021b). One of the groups recommended environmental monitoring,
development of emergency procedures and plans, training, a buddy system
to monitor for health effects, and communication of heat mitigation
strategies (Morrissey et al., 2021b).
III. Experimental and Observational Evidence
A. Rest Breaks
Administrative controls, such as varying employees' work schedules,
are a well-accepted and long-standing approach to protect workers from
occupational hazards. Administrative controls are regularly used to
address limitations in human capacity for physical work and commonly
include work-rest cycles. Rest breaks provide an opportunity for
workers to reduce their metabolic rate and body temperature
periodically throughout the day. Length and frequency of breaks can be
adjusted based on heat exposure, workload, acclimatization, and
clothing/PPE factors. Such an approach of work-rest cycles that
consider these factors has been recommended by NIOSH and ACGIH (NIOSH,
2016; ACGIH 2023). Observational and experimental studies show the
effectiveness of rest breaks in reducing heat strain that could lead to
HRIs, and those studies are described below. In addition to reducing
heat strain, rest breaks allow workers to take advantage of other
cooling strategies, such as hydrating, removing PPE, and sitting in
areas that are shaded, cooled, or fanned. The literature on the
efficacy of rest breaks described below includes observational studies
of workers, laboratory-based exercise trials, and predictive modeling.
I. Observational Studies
Several observational studies examined participants in work
settings or training exercises while at work and at rest and evaluated
the associations between rest breaks or time at rest and markers of
heat strain.
Horn et al. (2013) evaluated core body temperature and heart rate
(HR) among nine firefighters (six male and three females, ages 20-45
years) over a 3-hour period in which four repeat bouts of firefighting
drills were conducted (approximately 15-30 minutes each) while wearing
full PPE and a self-contained breathing apparatus. The drills were
separated by three rest periods (approximately 20-40 minutes each) in
which the firefighters were encouraged to hydrate and cool down by
removing their gear, while being evaluated/critiqued by instructors and
refilling air cylinders. The study authors estimated the duration of
work and rest cycle lengths based on sustained rates of heart rate
increases and decreases. Ambient temperatures ranged from 15 [deg]C to
25 [deg]C (59-77 [deg]F) during the summer and fall months when this
study was conducted. During work cycles, mean maximum core temperatures
ranged from 38.4-38.7 [deg]C, mean peak heart rate ranged from 181.2-
188.4 beats per minute (bpm), and the mean average heart rate (averaged
over 60 second intervals per work cycle) ranged from 139.6-160.0 bpm.
Mean maximum core temperature and mean average heart rate decreased
during rest periods, and the study authors concluded that physiological
recovery in this study appeared to be closely linked to the duration of
rest periods. Rest break duration was significantly and negatively
correlated with the following measurements taken during rest breaks:
minimum heart rate (r: -0.687, p<0.001), average heart rate (r: -0.482,
p=0.011), and minimum core temperature (r: -0.584, p=0.001), indicating
that longer breaks result in reduced heat strain. The authors concluded
that the association was independent of obesity, fitness, and intensity
of firefighting activities. Limitations noted by study authors included
enrollment of young firefighters who were screened for cardiovascular
disease, and thus might not represent the whole firefighting
population. In addition, ``significant breaks'' were provided and the
duration of exposure to fires was shortened later in the day, both
factors that might underestimate increases in core temperatures with
longer firefighting activities and shorter breaks.
Petropoulos et al. (2023) characterized heat stress and heat strain
in a cohort of 569 male outdoor workers in Nicaragua (sugarcane,
plantain, and brickmaking industries) and El Salvador (sugarcane, corn,
and construction industries) across three workdays in 2018. Median wet
bulb globe temperatures (WBGT) ranged from 26.0-29.2 [deg]C (78.8-84.6
[deg]F) and median heat index ranged from 28.5-36.1 [deg]C (83.3-97.0
[deg]F) at the work sites. Time spent on rest breaks-estimated based on
physical activity data collected with an accelerometer (i.e., a device
that can be used to measure physical activity and sedentary time)--was
estimated at 4.1-21% of the shift. A 10% increase in the time spent on
break was associated with a 1.5% absolute decrease in median percent
maximum heart rate (95% CI: -2.1%, -0.85%; p<0.0001), when adjusting
for industry/company, job task, shift duration, liquid consumption,
median WBGT, and mean metabolic rate. Petropoulos et al. (2023) found
no significant associations between rest breaks and maximum core body
temperature, and concluded that the lack of findings could have been
due to incomplete control of confounding factors.
Lucas et al. (2023) examined the effects of recommended rest breaks
for sugarcane workers in Nicaragua, specifically in male burned cane
cutters, by comparing the period from 2019-2020, identified as Harvest
3 (H3; n=40 burned cane cutters) with the period from 2018-2019,
identified as Harvest 2 (H2; n=12 burned cane cutters). OSHA notes that
a major limitation of the study identified by authors was a shorter
shift duration by 1 to 2 hours for seed cutters (SC) during H2, and
that ``the shorter shifts in H2 likely affected SC workload comparisons
between H2 and H3 and could explain why increasing the rest component
in H3 did not reduce the physiological workload in this group.''
Because of this limitation in seed cutters, this summary focuses on
effects on burned cane cutters. In H3, an extra 10-minute rest break
was recommended (increasing recommended rest breaks to a total of 80
min over a six-hour shift), and interventions from H2 were continued
(e.g., improvements to hydration and movable tents, in addition to
delaying cutting after burning to reduce radiant heat exposure). Daily
average WBGT was higher in H2: 29.5 [deg]C (85.1 [deg]F) than in H3:
26.7 [deg]C (80.6 [deg]F). Rest periods were defined by a greater than
10 bpm drop in heart rate lasting 4 or more minutes, as determined by
continuous measurements by heart rate sensors
[[Page 70750]]
worn on the chest; based on those measurements, the rest/work ratio for
burned cane cutters increased slightly from 21% rest in H2 to 26% rest
in H3. Average percent maximum heart rate (adjusted for age) decreased
slightly in H3 compared to H2 (mean [95% CI] 63% [60-65%] to 58% [56-
60%]) across the work shift). No significant differences were noted for
estimated core temperatures (based on modeling) from H2 to H3. The
study authors acknowledged that observational study design, small
number of workers in H2, and the lower temperatures in H3 may make
conclusions uncertain; therefore experimental laboratory studies may
better test the impact of the intervention. OSHA also observes that the
increased number of burned cane cutters observed from H2 to H3 means
that the population of workers observed was different in the two
periods and results may have been affected by different characteristics
of the workers.
Ioannou et al. (2021a) examined the effectiveness of rest breaks of
different durations in agricultural, construction, and tourism
employees. Findings in the intervention group were compared to a
``business as usual'' (BAU) group, where workers followed their normal
routine. Of note, shaded areas, water stations, and air-conditioned
areas to be used for rest breaks were part of BAU for construction
workers in Spain; those same interventions were part of BAU for
construction workers in Qatar, in addition to requiring workers to
carry a water bottle, and education. BAU practices were not specified
for the agriculture and tourism industries, but according to
communications with study authors, the BAU agricultural employees in
Qatar were not offered scheduled work/rest cycles, and agricultural
employees who were monitored in Qatar performed low intensity work
(Communication with Leonidas Ioannou, April 2024). Endpoints observed
included core temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, and metabolic
rate. No significant effects compared to the BAU group were observed
for any of these endpoints for agricultural workers in Cyprus provided
with a 90-second break every 30 minutes, tourism workers in Greece
provided with a 90-second break every 30 minutes or a 2-minute break
every 60 minutes combined with ice slurry ingestion, or construction
workers in Spain provided with two 7-minute breaks over the workday.
For employees in Qatar who were provided with 10-minute breaks every 50
minutes, significant differences in the intervention group compared to
the BAU group included lower mean skin temperature, heart rate, and
metabolic rate for construction employees, but increased heart rate for
agricultural employees. The study authors postulated that the increased
heart rate in agricultural workers resulted from inherent changes in
body posture (i.e., moving from a crouching position while crop picking
to standing and walking during breaks). A limitation in this study is
that some BAU groups, which were used as comparison groups, appeared to
have access to breaks in air-conditioned areas and it was not described
how the frequency or duration of rest breaks varied between the
intervention and BAU groups.
Two additional studies were conducted in utility workers. In a case
study by Meade et al. (2017), conducted in an unspecified location,
four highly experienced electrical utilities workers were observed via
video analysis over two consecutive hot days. The study authors noted
that employees often spent 80% or more of the monitoring period working
in direct sunlight. Meade et al. (2017) reported similar average core
body temperatures and average %HRmax on both days, despite an increase
in the percentage of time spent at rest on Day 2 versus Day 1 (time at
rest: 66 5%, range: 60-71%, on Day 2 versus 51 15%, range: 30-63% on Day 1). Three of the four workers had a
higher peak core temperature on Day 2 than Day 1. The study authors
attributed these core temperature and heart rate trends in part to
residual heat storage or fatigue-related changes in work efficiency
that possibly occurred over two consecutive work shifts. Meade et al.
(2016a) observed work and rest periods in 32 electrical utilities
workers (mean age of 36 years; 11 ground workers, 9 bucket workers, 12
manual pole workers; 17 in West Virginia, 15 in Texas) via video
analysis and accelerometry over 1 day (Heat Index: West Virginia 48
3 [deg]C (118.4 [deg]F), Texas 42 3 [deg]C
(107.6 [deg]F)). On average, the work-to-rest ratio was (3.1 3.9):1 and workers rested for a total of 35.9 15.9%
of the work shift. Heat index, work-to-rest ratios, work shift
duration, and time at rest were not significantly correlated with mean
core temperature or %HRmax. However, time spent or percentage of time
in heavy work was moderately, positively correlated with mean core
temperature (r=0.51) and %HRreserve (r=0.40) (i.e., increased time
spent in heavy work was associated with increased mean core temperature
and %HRmax). OSHA notes limitation in these studies, including, for
example, the very small sample size in Meade et al. (2017) and lack of
adjustment for possible confounding factors in Meade et al. (2016a).
A limited number of cross-sectional studies surveyed or interviewed
employees for self-reported symptoms of HRI to determine possible risks
associated with inadequate breaks. These types of studies are the most
limited because of uncertainties such as recall bias (i.e., inaccurate
recollection of previous events or experiences) and the potential for
dependent misclassification as a result of using self-reporting for
characterizing both the exposure and outcome. Therefore, only brief
summaries of these studies are provided. Two of these studies were
conducted in agricultural workers in the U.S. (Spector et al., 2015;
Fleischer et al., 2013), and one was conducted in pesticide applicators
in Italy (Ricc[ograve] et al., 2020). Spector et al. (2015) found a
significantly increased odds of HRI in workers paid by piece as
compared to workers paid hourly (OR: 6.20, 95% CI: 1.11, 34.54).
Spector et al. (2015) noted that piece rate workers might work harder
and faster because of economic incentives, thus leading to increased
metabolic heat generation; however, adjustment for task and exertion in
the small sample size of employees did not completely attenuate the
observed association, thus suggesting other factors contributed to
development of symptoms. Through population intervention modeling,
Fleischer et al. (2013) estimated that the prevalence of three or more
HRI symptoms could be reduced by 6.0% if workers had access to regular
breaks, and by 9.2% if breaks were taken in shaded areas. Of note,
participants in the study were asked about ``regular breaks,'' but the
term was not specified regarding frequency and duration. Lastly,
Ricc[ograve] et al. (2020) found taking rest breaks in shaded, non-air-
conditioned areas was associated with experiencing HRI (adjusted OR:
5.5, 95% CI: 1.4, 22), while taking rest breaks in cooler, air-
conditioned areas was not. Ricc[ograve] et al. (2020) discussed
possible reasons for the observed association between shaded rest
breaks and incidences of HRI, including that (1) taking breaks in shade
may be insufficient to prevent HRIs among pesticide applicators who
undertake more strenuous tasks or have longer exposures to unsafe
limits, and (2) rest breaks in shade may be taken to alleviate, rather
than prevent, HRI symptoms (i.e. possible reverse causation).
[[Page 70751]]
II. Experimental Studies
OSHA examined a number of laboratory studies that provide
information on the efficacy of rest breaks for preventing heat strain
or HRI in subjects exercising under conditions that include high heat
and at least moderate activity. The studies typically measured rectal
temperature, which allowed for an assessment of the efficacy of breaks
in maintaining lower rectal temperatures and slowing the increase in
rectal temperatures. ACGIH (2023) indicates that an increase in rectal
temperature exceeding 1 [deg]C from a ``pre-job'' temperature of less
than 37.5 [deg]C might indicate excessive heat strain. One study
summarized below also examines the effect of rest breaks on the
autonomic nervous system and cardiovascular function.
Smallcombe et al. (2022) conducted a study over a seven-hour period
that was designed to mimic a typical workday in the U.S. In that study,
9 males (average age 23.7 years) of varying fitness levels walked on a
treadmill at speeds to maintain a constant heart rate of 130 bpm, which
the authors indicated to be the demarcation between moderate and heavy
strain. The subjects completed six cycles of exercise for 50 minutes in
the heat chamber separated by 10 minutes of rest at an ambient
temperature of 21 [deg]C (69.8 [deg]F), 50% relative humidity (RH)
while drinking water as desired. A one-hour lunch period was also
provided at 21 [deg]C (69.8 F), 50% RH after the third exercise period,
with all subjects given the same lunch and allowed to drink water as
desired. Each subject was tested under 4 temperature conditions: (1)
referent (cool condition) at 15 [deg]C (59 [deg]F) (WBGT = 12.6
[deg]C); (2) moderate condition at 35 [deg]C (95 [deg]F) (WBGT = 29.4
[deg]C); (3); hot condition at 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F) (WBGT = 33.4
[deg]C); and (4) very hot condition at 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F) (WBGT =
36.1 [deg]C). The RH for each temperature condition was approximately
50%, except for the very hot condition, which was 70% RH. In the very
hot condition group, data were limited for the sixth exercise cycle
because an unspecified number of participants reached the cut-off point
for terminating the study (i.e., a heart rate exceeding 130 bpm while
at rest).
Significant increases in mean rectal temperature were observed in
the moderate, hot, and very hot condition groups in work period 1
versus work period 6, but the average rectal temperature remained at or
below 38 [deg]C (100.4 [deg]F) in all groups during each exercise
period (figure S1 and table S2) (Smallcombe et al., 2022). No
individual subject had a rectal temperature that exceeded 38 [deg]C in
the referent and moderate condition groups, however, three subjects
exceeded 38 [deg]C in the hot exposure group, and four subjects
exceeded 38 [deg]C in the very hot exposure group. With the exception
of two subjects whose rectal temperatures were measured at
approximately 38.6 [deg]C (101.5 [deg]F) and 38.7 [deg]C (101.7 [deg]F)
in the very hot exposure group, all rectal temperatures were below 38.5
[deg]C (as estimated from Figure S1). In addition, mean rectal
temperatures dropped during each rest period, with all rectal
temperatures measured near or below 38 [deg]C by the end of the rest
period (as estimated from Figure 4). Skin temperatures did not increase
during work periods. The authors concluded that under the conditions of
this study, which limited metabolic heat production based on the fixed
heart rate protocol, participants rarely reached levels of core
temperature that would be concerning. Study limitations noted by study
authors included possible limited relevance of breaks provided in
cooler areas, and the possibility that thermo-physiological impacts may
have been higher had breaks not been provided in cooler areas or
metabolic heat production not been limited.
In Uchiyama et al. (2022) thirteen males (average age 39 years)
each underwent two 225-minute trials that included 180 minutes of
treadmill walking in a chamber at 37 [deg]C (98.6 [deg]F) and 40% RH
interspersed with 45 minutes of rest breaks in an air-conditioned room
at 22 [deg]C (71.6 [deg]F) and 35% RH, designed to mimic summer working
and rest conditions at mines in Northwest Australia. Participants were
allowed to drink room temperature water during exercise and
refrigerated water while on rest breaks. Two different rest/work cycles
were tested, including (1) current practice: 1 hour of work and 30
minutes of rest, followed by 1 hour of work and 15 minutes rest, and a
final 1 hour work period; and (2) experimental: 1 hour of work and 15
minutes rest, followed by three half hour work periods separated by 10-
minute rest periods and, and a final half hour work period. OSHA
observes that in the current practice group, average core temperature
only increased by more than 1 [deg]C (1.8 [deg]F) of baseline level at
the final measurement reported at 180 minutes into the study (increased
from 37.2 [deg]C at baseline to 38.29 [deg]C at 180 minutes). Average
core temperatures remained within 1 [deg]C of baseline levels in the
experimental group at all time points.
Three studies (Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al., 2017; and
Kaltsatou et al., 2020) conducted 2-hour studies in which small groups
of 9-12 males cycled in a heat chamber at 360 watts (W) of metabolic
heat production (considered moderate-to-heavy intensity and equivalent
to conditions experienced by some workers in the mining and utility
industries). Over the 2-hour period, the effects of various
temperatures (approximate values provided) and work/rest protocols
recommended by ACGIH were examined including: (1) continuous work at
WBGT 28 [deg]C (82.4 [deg]F) (41 [deg]C (105.8 [deg]F) dry-bulb, 19.5%
RH or 36 [deg]C (96.8 [deg]F) dry-bulb, 38% RH); (2) a 3:1 work/rest
ratio (15 min work, 5 min rest) at WBGT 29 [deg]C (84.2 [deg]F) (43
[deg]C (109.4 [deg]F) dry-bulb, 17.5% RH or 38 [deg]C (100.4 [deg]F)
dry-bulb, 34% RH); and (3) a 1:1 work/rest ratio (15 min work, 15 min
rest) at WBGT 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F) (46 [deg]C (114.8 [deg]F) dry-bulb,
13.5% RH or 40 [deg]C (104 [deg]F) dry-bulb, 30% RH). Meade et al.
(2016b) examined a fourth condition: 4) a 1:3 work/rest ratio (15 min
work, 45 min rest) at WBGT 31.5 [deg]C (88.7 [deg]F) (46.5 [deg]C
(115.7 [deg]F) dry-bulb, 17.5% RH). The mean age of participants in the
Meade et al. (2016b) study was 21 years while the mean age in both the
Lamarche et al. (2017) and Kaltsatou et al. (2020) studies was 58
years.
Meade et al. (2016b) found that among younger males, the
percentages of participants with rectal temperatures exceeding 38
[deg]C over the 2-hour protocol was lower in the groups who took longer
rest breaks, despite those groups also being subjected to a higher
WBGT. Meade et al. (2016b) reported core temperatures exceeding 38
[deg]C in 12% of participants in the 1:3 work/rest at 31.5 [deg]C WBGT
group, 0% in the 1:1 work/rest at 30 [deg]C WBGT group, 33% in the 3:1
work/rest at 29 [deg]C WBGT group, and 33% in the continuous work at 28
[deg]C WBGT group.
Lamarche et al. (2017) found that among older males, the percentage
of participants with rectal temperatures exceeding 38 [deg]C over the
2-hour protocol was lowest in the group with the longest breaks (i.e.,
67% in the 1:1 work/rest at 30 [deg]C WBGT group, 100% in the 3:1 work/
rest at 29 [deg]C WBGT group, and 100% in the continuous work at 28
[deg]C WBGT group) although the findings did not achieve statistical
significance. Lamarche et al. (2017) also reported that time to exceed
a rectal temperature of 38 [deg]C was higher in both groups who
received rest breaks as compared with the continuous work group and
this did reach statistical significance. Specifically, the time to
exceed a rectal temperature of 38 [deg]C was 100 minutes in the 1:1
work/rest at 30 [deg]C WBGT group, 79 minutes in the 3:1 work/rest at
29 [deg]C WBGT group, and 53 minutes in the
[[Page 70752]]
continuous work at 28 [deg]C WBGT group. Further, because of heat
exhaustion, five participants in the Lamarche et al. (2017) study did
not complete the continuous work at 28 [deg]C WBGT protocol, one did
not complete the 3:1 work/rest at 29 [deg]C WBGT protocol, but all
completed the 1:1 work/rest 30 [deg]C WBGT protocol. No significant
differences in heart rate were observed.
Kaltsatou et al. (2020) examined autonomic stress and
cardiovascular function in the same subjects examined by Larmarche et
al. (2017). The authors measured 12 markers of heart rate variability
(HRV), a predictor of adverse heart events, most of which are
associated with the autonomic nervous system (i.e., a part of the
nervous system that controls involuntary responses including heart rate
and blood pressure). After one hour of accumulated work and when rectal
temperatures exceeded 38 [deg]C, three markers of HRV were
significantly lower in the continuous work group than in the 3:1 work/
rest at 29 [deg]C WBGT group. One marker of HRV was significantly lower
in the continuous group, compared to the 1:1 work/rest at 30 [deg]C
WBGT group at 1 hour of accumulated work. After 2 hours of accumulated
work, 4 markers of HRV were significantly lower in the continuous work
group compared to the 1:1 work/rest at 30 [deg]C WBGT group. Study
authors interpreted these results to indicate that continuous work was
the least safe for workers, while a 1:1 work/rest ratio offered the
best protection. Kaltsatou al. (2020) concluded that breaks during
moderate-to-heavy work in heat can reduce autonomic stress and increase
the time to exceed a rectal temperature of 38 [deg]C.
In the studies by Meade et al. (2016b), Lamarche et al. (2017), and
Kaltsatou et al. (2020), participants were well-hydrated before the
study period but not provided drinking water during the study.
Kaltsatou et al. (2020) acknowledged that not providing water during
the study could have affected sweat secretion and, as a result heat
balance, hydration status, baroreceptor function (involved in blood
pressure regulation), and the autonomic control of heart rate. OSHA
agrees and also notes that rest breaks were provided in the same
ambient conditions as work periods, and studies were conducted at a
fixed work rate that would have not considered possible effects of
self-pacing. Because hydration and shade or cooling measures during
rest breaks would be provided as part of an effectively implemented
multi-pronged approach to preventing HRI, OSHA preliminarily concludes
that some of the effects observed in these studies might have been less
severe if interventions other than rest were provided.
In a study by Chan et al. (2012), recovery time, as measured by
physiological strain index (based on heart rate and core temperatures),
was determined in 19 healthy construction rebar employees (mean age 45
years) who had worked until exhaustion at building construction sites
in Hong Kong in July and August of 2011. Average recovery during rest
was reported at 94% in 40 minutes, 93% in 35 minutes, 92% in 30
minutes, 88% in 25 minutes, 84% in 20 minutes, 78% in 15 minutes, 68%
in 10 minutes, and 58% in 5 minutes. Yi and Chan (2013) used the field-
based meteorological and physiological data reported by Chan et al.
(2012) to model ideal rest breaks to minimize HRI. Based on a Monte
Carlo simulation, the authors determined that a 15-minute break after
120 minutes of continuous work in the morning at 28.9 [deg]C (84.0
[deg]F) WBGT and a 20-minute break after 115 minutes of continuous work
in the afternoon at 32.1 [deg]C WBGT (90.0 [deg]F) maximized
productivity time while protecting the health and safety of employees.
III. Conclusions for Rest Breaks
OSHA reviewed several studies examining the effectiveness of rest
breaks in preventing heat strain that could lead to HRI and were of
sufficient quality for drawing conclusions (Horn et al., 2013;
Smallcombe et al., 2022; Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al., 2017;
Kaltsatou et al., 2020; Petropoulos et al., 2023). The studies,
involving individuals exposed to conditions of high heat stress,
demonstrated the effectiveness of rest breaks in preventing measures of
heat strain that can lead to HRI. Observational studies with detailed
measurements of temperatures in firefighters doing training exercises
and experimental studies in laboratory settings reported that rest
breaks result in lower core or rectal temperatures during rest periods
following work periods (Horn et al., 2013; Smallcombe et al., 2022),
and lower rectal temperatures over the study period (Meade et al.,
2016b; Lamarche et al., 2017), with all of the studies showing greater
effectiveness of longer compared to shorter duration work breaks.
Similarly, Chan et al. (2012) reported increased physiological recovery
with longer rest periods. Uchiyama et al. (2022) reported little
evidence of heat strain in participants exercising in hot conditions
and provided rest breaks. The study by Lamarche et al. (2017) also
found that rest breaks were effective in preventing heat exhaustion in
a laboratory setting. OSHA also found evidence showing that rest breaks
can reduce cardiovascular strain. For example, Horn et al. (2013) found
that heart rates were lower in rest than in work cycles. One study done
in participants in a laboratory setting showed that rest breaks can
reduce autonomic stress that affects cardiovascular function (Kaltsatou
et al., 2020). Those findings are consistent with an observational
study of employees in occupational settings that found an association
between time spent on rest breaks and decreases in heart rate when
adjusted for industry/company, job task, shift duration, liquid
consumption, WBGT, and metabolic rate (Petropoulos et al., 2023).
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily finds rest breaks to be effective
in reducing the risk of HRI by modulating increases in heat and
cardiovascular strain.
B. Shade
Working or resting in shade reduces the risk of HRI by decreasing
exposure to solar radiation and in turn reducing overall heat load.
Studies evaluating the impact of shade on heat strain metrics have
predominantly been conducted in controlled settings where participants
exercise in conditions approximating shade and sun exposure. Studies
evaluating the physiological benefits of exercising in shade versus sun
are likely to underestimate the benefits of rest breaks taken in shade
because metabolic heat generation would be slowed while resting.
A number of studies examining the effects of exercising under
natural or simulated conditions of sun or shade have demonstrated
benefits of shade. One group of investigators conducted studies where
participants cycled under simulated laboratory conditions of sun or
shade (Otani et al., 2016; Otani et al., 2021); both studies were
conducted under conditions of 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F) and 50% RH, and
participants cycled at a rate of 70% maximum oxygen uptake until
reaching full exhaustion. The Otani et al. (2021) study also involved
exposures to low and high wind speeds. The same investigators conducted
45-minute, self-pacing cycling trials outdoors under various natural
sunlight conditions, including clear skies or thick and thin cloud
covers (Otani et al., 2019). These studies reported that higher
exposure to solar radiation resulted in higher skin temperatures (Otani
et al., 2016, 2019, 2021) and reduced work output (measured as
endurance capacity/time-to-exhaustion (Otani et al., 2016; 2021) or
power output (Otani et al., 2019)). In increased
[[Page 70753]]
sun conditions, Otani et al. (2021) reported higher rectal
temperatures, heart rates, and thermal sensation. Otani et al. (2019)
reported greater thermal sensations, and body heat gain from the sun,
but no significant effects on rectal temperature or heart rate in
increased sun conditions. Otani et al. (2016) reported no differences
in rectal temperatures or heart rates in increased sun conditions. The
authors speculated in their 2019 paper that the lack of rectal
temperature increase in that study likely resulted from a reduction in
self-regulated exercise under sunny conditions (Otani et al., 2019).
They did not however speculate reasons for the lack of rectal
temperature increases in their 2016 paper. OSHA notes that under
equivalent (full sun) solar radiation levels the time it took
participants to reach exhaustion in the Otani et al. (2021) study under
low wind speeds (35.4 minutes) was longer than the time it took
participants in the Otani et al. (2016) study to reach exhaustion (22.5
minutes), and OSHA expects that the disparate findings on rectal
temperatures may have resulted from differences in total cycling time.
In a study by Nielsen et al. (1988) participants cycled at a fixed
rate outdoors in the sun for 60 minutes, were shaded for 30 minutes
while continuing to cycle, and then cycled again in the sun for another
30 minutes, for a total of 120 minutes. Study authors noted that cloud
formation interrupted 3 of the 20 cycling trials. Average rectal
temperatures rose sharply during the first period of cycling in sun,
dropped slightly (non-significantly) during the period of cycling in
shade, and then gradually increased again during the final cycling
period in full sun. Skin temperatures remained fairly constant during
the initial period of cycling in sun, dropped significantly by 1.5
[deg]C (2.7 [deg]F) while cycling in shade, and rose again sharply
during the final cycling period in the sun. Heart rate, oxygen
consumption, and sweat rate were significantly higher in the final
cycling period in full sun, compared to the cycling period in shade.
Study authors concluded that heat received from direct solar radiation
``imposed a measurable physiological stress.''
In a study examining work capacity in adults walking for one hour
under various conditions of solar radiation (full sun or full shade),
temperature (25 [deg]C through 45 [deg]C; 77 [deg]F through 113
[deg]F), humidity (20% or 80%), and clothing coverage, Foster et al.
(2022b) reported that work capacity (calculated using treadmill speed
and grade) was generally lower under full sun conditions than shaded
conditions. Under humid conditions, work capacity was reduced by solar
radiation for all scenarios. Under dry conditions, work capacity
reduction varied by clothing coverage with those wearing full-body work
coveralls showing reduced work capacity at temperatures >=35 [deg]C
(>=95 [deg]F) and those wearing minimal clothing showing reduced work
capacity at temperatures >=40 [deg]C (>=104 [deg]F). Skin temperature
was generally higher under full sun conditions, and the authors
speculated that a lack of effect on core body temperatures likely
resulted from self-regulation during exercise.
Ioannou et al. (2021b) conducted a laboratory based randomized
control trial in which seven participants completed cycling trials
under full sun (800 W/m\2\) and full shade (0 W/m\2\) in hot (WBGT 30
[deg]C) and temperate (WBGT 20 [deg]C) conditions. The full sun
condition was associated with increased skin temperature at both
temperatures. Average core body temperature was similar between sunny
and shaded conditions (37.7 and 37.6 [deg]C for sun versus shade in hot
conditions and 37.2 [deg]C for both sun and shade in temperate
conditions). Solar radiation had a small, positive relationship with
heart rate (average heart rate of 114.0 and 109.1 bpm in sun versus
shade in hot conditions and 102.6 and 95.4 bpm in sun versus shade in
temperate conditions) (Ioannou et al., 2021b).
Although these experimental studies largely assessed the effects of
shade during exercise and not rest periods, they do support the idea
that shade reduces heat strain generally; therefore, OSHA preliminary
concludes that it is reasonable to assume access to shade would also
reduce heat strain during rest periods. This conclusion is also
supported by evidence that shade reduces heat exposure (see discussion
below) and that heat exposure is positively associated with heat strain
(see discussion in Section IV., Health Effects). OSHA identified no
major limitations in these studies that would preclude their use in
drawing conclusions about effectiveness. One aspect of all these
studies that limit applicability to the larger workforce is that
participants were all young and healthy and all or mostly male (age was
not specified in Ioannou et al. (2021b)), and the studies were done for
relatively short durations of time (2 hours or less). The authors of
the Otani et al. (2021) and Foster et al. (2022b) studies that used
artificial solar radiation noted that their studies would not reflect
changes in the sun's position during the day or changes in radiation
intensity levels, and that limitation would be relevant to the other
studies using artificial sources of solar radiation at one intensity
level.
There are also two observational studies in the peer-reviewed
literature that have evaluated the association between shade and risk
of HRI. In a case-control study of 109 acclimatized construction and
agriculture workers, Ioannou et al. (2021b) monitored workers for four
or more consecutive 11-hour shifts, in which environmental factors were
continuously measured and work hours characterized by the same thermal
stress but different solar radiation levels were isolated. Solar
exposure was categorized as either indoors, mixed indoors and outdoors,
or outdoors, and analyses were done for data collected during
conditions of 30 [deg]C WBGT. Results included a positive association
between sun exposure and skin temperature and a significantly higher
risk for heat strain symptoms (relative risk (RR) = 2.40, 95% CI: 1.78,
3.24) and reported weakness (RR = 3.17, 95% CI: 1.76, 5.71) among
workers exposed to solar exposure characterized as outdoors as compared
to workers exposed to solar exposure characterized as indoors. Core
body temperature, heart rate, and metabolic rate were not found to be
associated with sun exposure. The authors attributed the lack of change
in core temperature and heart rate to the effect of self-pacing. OSHA
notes that the study did not control for confounding variables.
Fleischer et al. (2013) used population intervention modeling of
self-reported HRI symptoms in farmworkers in Georgia to estimate that
the prevalence of three or more HRI symptoms could have been reduced by
9.2% (95% CI: -15.2%, -3.1%) if workers could always or usually take
breaks in the shade. There were limitations to this analysis, including
the cross-sectional study design, the self-reported exposure and
outcome data, and low participation rate.
Additional studies have evaluated differences in microclimatic
conditions between shady and sunny environments, independent of heat
strain metrics measured in human subjects. These studies provide clear
evidence that shade reduces radiant heat (Cheela et al., 2021; do
Nascimento M[oacute]s et al., 2022; Fournel et al., 2017; Karvatte et
al., 2016, 2021; Klok et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2020; Middel and
Krayenhoff, 2019; Sanusi et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2022). As
discussed above, indicators of heat strain (e.g., rectal temperature)
often increase with exposure to solar radiation. These authors examined
the impact of shade through direct measures that assess radiant heat
(e.g., globe temperature,
[[Page 70754]]
mean radiant temperature) or through thermal stress metrics (e.g.,
Universal Thermal Climate Index) that incorporate radiant heat in their
calculation.
The magnitude of the reduction in radiant heat from shade, however,
varies by local conditions, with notable factors including the type of
shade (e.g., trees, buildings, canopies, and other urban structures
such as solar arrays), percent shade cover, time of day, season, and
ground cover (due to its role in radiant heat emission). Fournel et al.
(2017) estimated an average 4.4 [deg]C decrease in black globe
temperature using data from five studies that assessed different shade
interventions, while study-specific reductions ranged from 2 [deg]C to
9 [deg]C. These included a study by Roman-Ponce et al. (1977), who
observed a 9 [deg]C difference in Florida under an insulated metal
roof, and a study by Fisher et al. (2008), who observed a 2 [deg]C
difference in New Zealand under a shade cloth structure. Examples of
other studies that have evaluated the impact of shade on radiant heat
include:
Middel and Krayenhoff (2019) evaluated environmental
conditions across 22 sites in Tempe, Arizona on the hottest day of the
summer. They included diverse types of shade, including trees and urban
structures. The authors concluded that trees decreased afternoon mean
radiant temperature by up to 33.4 [deg]C and estimated that each 0.1
decrease in the sky view factor from trees (where a sky view factor of
1 is a completely open sky and 0 is fully blocked) resulted in an
approximate decrease of 4 [deg]C in mean radiant temperature (Middel
and Krayenhoff, 2019).
Zhang et al. (2022) compared meteorological parameters
among 12 locations in a coastal city in China. Mean globe temperature
over the beach in full sun (40.9 [deg]C) was higher than mean globe
temperatures in areas shaded by dense trees (28.9 [deg]C) or shaded by
a pavilion canopy (30.8 [deg]C) (Zhang et al., 2022).
Karvatte et al. (2016) evaluated the impacts of different
types of natural shade (two densities of eucalyptus trees and isolated
native trees) on environmental conditions in Brazil. Average black
globe temperatures from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. in the shade ranged from 33.2
[deg]C to 34.3 [deg]C, which were 2.4 [deg]C to 8.2 [deg]C lower than
that measured in nearby sunny areas (Karvatte et al., 2016).
do Nascimento M[oacute]s et al. (2022) evaluated the
effectiveness of four different shade structures (native trees, black
polypropylene netting, heat-reflective netting, and a combination of
both types of netting) in the Brazilian savanna. Mean radiant
temperature was consistently lower under shaded conditions. For
example, at 11 a.m. and 12 p.m., the peak hours, the mean radiant
temperatures were 16[deg]C to 20 [deg]C lower in shady conditions than
sunny conditions (do Nascimento M[oacute]s et al., 2022).
I. Conclusions for Shade
In conclusion, measurements of environmental conditions indicate
that exposure to radiant heat is greater in full sun than in shaded
conditions (e.g., Middel and Krayenhoff, 2019; do Nascimento M[oacute]s
et al., 2022). It is well known that radiant heat contributes to heat
stress (NIOSH, 2016). Studies confirm that indicators of heat strain
(e.g., increased heart rate, increased rectal temperature) are often
higher in participants exercising in conditions with actual or
simulated solar radiation versus shade (e.g., Otani et al., 2021). One
study showed that a 30-minute period of exercising in shade,
interspersed between two periods of exercising in full sun, resulted in
improved physiological responses (e.g., lower heat rate, oxygen
consumption, and sweat loss) compared to the two periods of exercising
in full sun (Nielsen et al., 1988). OSHA expects that improvements in
physiological function might have been even greater if the participants
had rested in shade because resting slows the metabolic generation of
heat.
OSHA preliminarily finds that resting in shade will reduce the risk
of HRI by decreasing exposure to radiant heat that contributes to heat
stress and can lead to heat strain and then HRI.
C. Fans
Fans are engineering controls that increase air movement across the
skin and under the right environmental conditions can increase the
evaporation of sweat, resulting in greater heat loss from the body.
However, they may not be appropriate for all environments, such as at
higher temperatures. Research on the role of fans in HRI prevention
largely focuses on non-occupational and athletic populations, however
some chamber trials have been designed to mimic working conditions. A
summary of the experimental literature is provided here, beginning with
studies that evaluate the use of fans during physical activity, before
or after activity, and while people are at rest, and then concluding
with studies that model efficacy thresholds for fan use.
Studies by Saunders et al. (2005) and Otani et al. (2018, 2021)
examined the effects of different air speeds on individuals cycling in
heated chambers with no rest period included in the study design
(Saunders et al., 2005: 33.0 [deg]C 0.4 [deg]C and 59%
3% RH; air speeds ranging from 0.2 km/hr to 50.1 km/hr;
Otani et al., 2018: 30 [deg]C and 50% RH; air speeds ranging from 0 km/
hr to 30 km/hr; Otani et al., 2021: 30 [deg]C and 50% RH; air speeds of
10 and 25 km/hr). In measures of work output, at higher air velocities
Saunders et al. (2005) reported increased cycling time before
participants' core temperature reached 40 [deg]C (criteria for
terminating the trial) and Otani et al. (2018, 2021) reported increased
time to exhaustion. In lower/no compared to higher air velocities, (1)
Saunders et al. (2005) reported higher mean body temperature (weighted
mean of skin and rectal temperature), higher rectal and skin
temperature, increased heat storage (a measure that considers changes
in body temperature, in addition to body weight and surface area), and
lower evaporative capacity; (2) Otani et al. (2018) reported higher
rectal, skin, and mean body temperature, and lower evaporative heat
loss; while (3) Otani et al. (2021) reported no significant effect on
skin temperature but higher rectal temperatures. Higher heart rates
were also observed at lower/no versus higher air velocities (Saunders
et al., 2005; Otani et al., 2018, 2021).
Other studies have examined the effectiveness of fans during both
exercise and rest periods. In Jay et al. (2019), participants conducted
arm exercises designed to mimic textile work at 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F)
and 70% RH, with and without fanning. In a study by Wright Beatty et
al. (2015), participants cycled in a chamber at 35 [deg]C (95 [deg]F)
and 60% RH, with air velocities of 0.5 m/s and 3.0 m/s. Wright Beatty
et al. designed the study to mimic occupational conditions, like those
for miners (both workload and clothing). Under the fan/high air
velocity conditions: (1) Jay et al. (2019) observed a smaller increase
in rectal temperature, and lower skin temperature, but there was no
change in heart rate because the study was designed to maintain a
constant heart rate; and (2) Wright Beatty et al. (2015) observed lower
rectal temperatures and heart rates. Jay et al. also compared
effectiveness of fanning to the presence of air-conditioning (7 [deg]C
lower temperature) and found higher work output and lower rectal
temperature in both the fanning and air-conditioning groups (relative
to the hot condition without fanning), while sweat loss was higher with
fanning compared to air-conditioning (Jay et al., 2019). Wright Beatty
et al. tested their conditions among both older (~59 years
[[Page 70755]]
old) and younger (~24 years old) participants and observed similar
benefits of higher air velocity among both age groups (Wright Beatty et
al., 2015).
In a handful of other studies, researchers tested the efficacy of
fan use during rest breaks, after subjects exercised under hot
conditions (Sefton et al., 2016; Selkirk et al., 2004; Barwood et al.,
2009; Carter, 1999). Conditions for these studies were (1) Sefton et
al.: 32 [deg]C 0.5 [deg]C and 75% 3% RH, with
shirt and under shirt removed during cooling, with and without misting
fan; (2) Selkirk et al.: 35[deg]C and 50% RH wearing firefighting
protective clothing and breathing apparatuses during exercise and
removal of protective gear during cooling periods with and without a
misting fan; (3) Barwood et al.: 31 [deg]C 0.2 [deg]C and
70% 2% RH, with and without whole body fanning; and (4)
Carter: 40 [deg]C and 70% RH wearing firefighting protective clothing
and breathing apparatuses during exercise and removal or unbuckling of
protective gear during cooling periods with and without a fan. In the
study by Sefton et al. (2016), rectal temperatures rose during the
cooling period, regardless of misting fan use, but heart rate was lower
with misting fan use; the study authors noted that under the high
humidity conditions of their study, misting fans could have increased
the moisture in air, thereby reducing cooling through sweat
evaporation. Other studies found fans or misting fans to be effective
in improving body temperature or cardiac effects. In comparisons of
normal recovery conditions (unbuckling of fire-fighting coat and no fan
use during rest) to enhanced recovery conditions (fire-fighting coat
was removed and fan used during rest), Carter (1999) reported lower
rectal and skin temperatures, heart rate, and oxygen consumption during
enhanced recovery compared to normal recovery conditions. Selkirk et
al. (2004) reported that the use of a misting fan during rest breaks
compared to no fan use resulted in lower rates of rectal temperature
increase, and lower skin temperatures and heart rates. Barwood et al.
(2009) reported that reductions in rectal and skin temperatures during
rest periods were greater with fan use than without, but there was no
significant effect on heart rate. Selkirk et al. (2004) also found that
participants were able to exercise longer when taking rest breaks with
misting fans than they were when taking rest breaks without misting
fans, and Barwood et al. (2009) found that participants were able to
run farther distances following whole-body fanning.
Other studies examined the use of fans during breaks in areas
cooler than where exercise took place. Hostler et al. (2010) conducted
a study similar to that by Selkirk et al., described above, where
subjects exercised on a treadmill while wearing firefighting protective
gear under hot conditions (35.1 2.7 [deg]C, RH not
specified), but in contrast to Selkirk et al. (2004), rest periods took
place at room temperature (24.0 1.4 [deg]C) instead of in
the heat chamber and a non-misting fan was used. In contrast to
findings from Selkirk et al. (2004), Hostler et al. (2010) reported
that fanning during breaks had no significant effects on core
temperature, heart rate, or exercise duration, and they speculated that
this was because rest breaks took place in a cooler area. The authors
conclude that active cooling devices may not be needed if the
temperature of the rest area is below 24 [deg]C (75.2[deg] F). Tokizawa
et al. (2014) reported that after pre-cooling in an area that was 28
[deg]C and had 40% RH, participants walking in a heat chamber (37
[deg]C and 40% RH) wearing protective clothing had lower rectal
temperatures, heart rate, and weight loss when exposed to fans and
water spray in the precooling period than the control condition without
fans and water spray (Tokizawa et al., 2014).
Additional studies provide information on conditions and
populations for which fans may or may not be effective. Ravanelli et
al. (2015; 2017) found that participants (mean age 24 3
years) were able to be exposed to higher levels of humidity at
temperatures of 36 [deg]C or 42 [deg]C when using fans before increases
in esophageal temperatures and heart rate were observed (i.e.,
inflection points) (Ravanelli et al., 2015; Ravanelli et al., 2017). At
42 [deg]C, the inflection points (when core temperature increases were
observed) occurred at a relative humidity level of 55% with fans
compared to 48% without fans. The relative humidity levels where heart
rate increases were observed with and without fans, respectively, were
83% and 62% at 36 [deg]C and 47% and 38% at 42 [deg]C. The researchers
found that heart rate was significantly lower at the end of the trials
with fans compared to without fans (under 36 [deg]C conditions: 74
9 bpm vs. 84 9 bpm; under 42 [deg]C
conditions: 87 9 vs. 94 9). This was also
true for esophageal temperatures at the end of the trials (under 36
[deg]C conditions: 36.7 0.2 [deg]C vs. 36.8
0.2 [deg]C; under 42 [deg]C conditions: 37.2 0.3 [deg]C
vs. 37.4 0.2 [deg]C). Rectal temperatures were higher with
no fans at the end of the trials in both conditions (36 [deg]C and 42
[deg]C), but these differences were not statistically significant
(Ravanelli et al., 2017). In contrast, Gagnon et al. (2016) found that
use of fans did not improve heart rate or core temperature inflection
points in response to increasing humidity levels, and heart rates and
core temperatures were higher with use of fans during exposure of older
adults (mean age 68 4 years) at 42 [deg]C. Gagnon et al.
speculated that lack of benefits may have resulted from age-related
impairments to sweat capacity. Morris NB et al. (2019) found that,
under hot and humid conditions (40 [deg]C, 50% RH; heat index of 56
[deg]C) fans reduced core temperatures and cardiovascular strain, but
were detrimental to all outcome measures under very hot but dry
conditions (47 [deg]C, 10% RH; heat index of 46 [deg]C). The authors
use these findings to caution against using heat index alone for
recommendations on beneficial versus harmful fan use.
While the fan efficacy studies discussed in this section so far
have been interventional in design, modeling studies have estimated the
temperature and RH thresholds at which fans are no longer effective at
reducing heat strain. Jay et al. (2015) argue that public health
guidelines for when fan use is harmful are too ambiguous and/or too low
(e.g., ``high 90s'' from the CDC (CDC, 2022). Morris et al. (2021)
modeled humidity-dependent temperature thresholds at which fans (3.5
meters/second wind velocity) become detrimental using validated
calorimetry equations, which calculate net heat transfer between a
person and their environment. Based on these equations and assumptions
on reduction in sweat rates among older individuals and individuals
taking anticholinergic medications, Morris et al. recommend that fans
should not be used at a humidity-dependent temperature above 39.0
[deg]C (102.2 [deg]F) for healthy young adults, 38.0 [deg]C (100.4
[deg]F) for healthy older adults above the age of 65, and 37.0 [deg]C
(98.6 [deg]F) for older adults taking anticholinergic medication
(Morris et al., 2021). While the authors provide more exact numbers
that account for humidity, they provide these thresholds as simple and
easy guidelines that only require knowing the temperature. Some
limitations of these studies include the use of assumptions in their
models that may not be realistic (e.g., fan producing an air velocity
of 3.5-4.5 meters/second sitting 1 meter away) and the use of
simplified heat-balance models, which predict the potential for heat
exchange rather than outcomes such as heat and
[[Page 70756]]
cardiovascular strain metrics (e.g., core temperature, heart rate).
There are many factors that influence an individual's heat exchange
potential, such as sex, hydration status, acclimatization status, and
clothing, and these simplified models often do not account for these
factors.
A recent article by Meade and colleagues criticized the simplified
thresholds published in Morris et al. (2021) as being too high for
general public health guidance (e.g., recommendations for the general
public during heat waves) (Meade et al., 2024). The authors modeled
core temperature changes rather than modeling potential for heat
exchange, arguing that Morris and colleagues did not consider in their
conclusions that the potential for greater heat exchange does not
always translate into increased sweat rates, particularly if core
temperatures are not high enough to elicit that sweat response. Meade
and colleagues modeled fan effectiveness under various hypothetical
environmental conditions and reported the expected impacts on core
temperatures for a young adult (18-40 years old) at rest wearing light
clothing. They estimated that fans (versus no fan) would lead to an
approximately 0.1 [deg]C increase in core temperature at ambient
temperatures of 37 [deg]C/98.6 [deg]F (when RH is 60-90%), 38 [deg]C/
100.4 [deg]F (when RH is 50-80%), and 39 [deg]C/102.2 [deg]F (when RH
is 50-80%) (Meade et al., 2024; Figure 1). Fans were estimated to be of
minimal impact (core temperature change of approximately 0.0 [deg]C) or
beneficial (reduction in core temperature) compared to no fans in drier
conditions at these ambient temperatures (37-39 [deg]C). In their
model, fans were always minimally impactful or beneficial at
temperatures below 37 [deg]C. Above 39 [deg]C, fans were more often
harmful (increase in core temperature greater than 0.2 [deg]C). These
model results were for strong fans (3.5-4.5 m/s air velocity), but in a
sensitivity analysis, Meade and colleagues present predicted core
temperature changes for slower fans (1 m/s air velocity) among young
adults. While these fans are less beneficial than strong fans at low
temperatures (e.g., below 34 [deg]C/93.2 [deg]F), they were predicted
to lead to smaller core temperature increases at higher temperatures
(e.g., 38 [deg]C) and humidities than the stronger fans (Meade et al.,
2024; Figure 4). In another model, the researchers predicted the
effects of fans combined with skin wetting (relative to no fan or skin
wetting) among young adults and found this combination was much more
beneficial than fans alone--they were beneficial or neutral in all
combinations of humidity and ambient temperature when ambient
temperature was 40 [deg]C/104 [deg]F or below (Meade et al., 2024;
Figure 6). One major limitation of these model results is the
assumption that the individual is at rest, rather than working. Fans
may be used in work areas, and it would be expected that they would be
associated with greater heat exchange potential in these scenarios, as
core temperature would be more likely to remain above levels that
prompt a sweat response. In a sensitivity analysis, the authors assumed
a range of metabolic rates, the highest being 90 W/m\2\, which they
describe as the equivalent to a seated person ``performing moderate
arts and crafts.'' In this scenario, fans were predicted to be more
beneficial around 30-34 [deg]C and in drier conditions (RH less than
30%) up to 39 [deg]C. These numbers may not apply to workers, as
evidenced in part by findings from a study described above (Carter,
1999), which found benefits to fans outside the range suggested by
Meade et al.
Another study did evaluate fan efficacy among participants
performing physical work (moderate to heavy workloads), collecting
empirical evidence from fixed heart rate trials and modeling the
effects of fans on heat storage at various temperatures and humidities
(Foster et al., 2022a). Foster et al. conducted 300 trials among 23
participants (24 cool, 15 [deg]C reference trials, 138 hot trials with
still air, and 138 hot trials with fans). The hot trials involved a
range of temperatures and humidities (35-50 [deg]C in 5 [deg]C
increments and 20-80% RH) and two clothing ensembles--low clothing
coverage (shorts and shoes) and higher clothing coverage (full-body
coverall, t-shirt, shorts, and shoes). For the fan trials, they used a
fan with a speed of 3.5 meters/second. The work output from the cool
reference trials was used as a baseline to calculate the change in work
capacity in the hot trials, which was used to validate their
biophysical model predicting change in heat storage (R-squared = 0.66).
The authors created categories for the percent change in work capacity
resulting from fan use relative to no fans--an increase of greater than
5% was termed ``beneficial'', a decrease of greater than 5% was termed
``detrimental'', and if the change was an increase or decrease of 5% or
less, it was called ``ineffective''. In the hot trials, the researchers
found fans to be beneficial or ineffective at both 35 [deg]C and 40
[deg]C (depending on the humidity) and ineffective at 45 [deg]C for the
higher clothing coverage (Figure 1 of Foster et al., 2022a). For the
low clothing coverage, the researchers found that fans had the
potential to be beneficial up to 45 [deg]C (at certain humidities), but
also had the potential to be detrimental at temperatures as low as 35
[deg]C (specifically when RH was 20%).
The biophysical model predicting change in heat storage was only
able to model the effects of fans for the low clothing coverage,
however, the authors note that the effects of fans were similar across
clothing groups except that fans weren't beneficial in the high
clothing coverage at temperatures equal to or above 45 [deg]C. Foster
et al. used a sweat rate in the model of approximately 1 liter per
hour, which was the group average from the trials. In Figure 4, the
authors present the output of their model, which suggests that fans
become detrimental beginning at a temperature of 39 [deg]C (102.2
[deg]F) (at certain humidities). At increasing temperatures, fan use is
detrimental at a wider range of humidity levels (both high and low
humidity), but beneficial or ineffective at other humidity levels.
Foster et al. also present model results with varying assumptions for
sweat rate and fan speed (Figure 6).
As discussed above, in their consensus statement, Morrissey et al.
(2021b) recommend the use of electric fans in an occupational setting
when ambient temperatures are below 40 [deg]C/104 [deg]F.
I. Conclusions for Fans
In conclusion, OSHA preliminarily finds that these studies show
that use of fans during work and/or rest breaks will be effective in
reducing heat strain in the majority of working age adults. Studies
also show that there are certain conditions (e.g., at a temperature of
102.2 [deg]F and above, depending on the humidity) under which fans may
not be beneficial and can be harmful to workers.
D. Water
Working and sweating in the heat put workers at risk for
dehydration and HRIs. Replacing fluids lost as sweat is necessary to
maintain blood volume for cardiovascular function and thermoregulation.
Multiple studies have examined the efficacy of hydration interventions,
while also considering various factors that may affect hydration such
as the quantity of liquid consumed, timing of ingestion, and beverage
temperature.
Studies in the peer-reviewed literature provide evidence that
hydration interventions are effective at combating dehydration and HRI.
For example, McLellan and Selkirk
[[Page 70757]]
performed a series of heat stress trials with 15 firefighters in Canada
wearing protective equipment at 35 [deg]C (95 [deg]F) and 50% relative
humidity (McLellan and Selkirk, 2006). During the trials, participants
conducted light exercise in a heat chamber and were provided one of
four fluid replacement quantities: no fluid, one-third fluid
replacement, two-thirds fluid replacement, or complete fluid
replacement (based on previously determined sweat rates). Each
participant completed two 20-minute exercise periods, separated by a
10-minute break for a simulated self-contained breathing apparatus
(SCBA) change, and then followed by a 20-minute rest break. Cool water
was provided during each break. Exercise continued until participants
reached an endpoint, defined as a rectal temperature over 39.5 [deg]C
(103.1 [deg]F), heart rate at 95% of maximum, experiencing dizziness or
nausea, or other safety concerns. Participants who received either two-
thirds or full fluid replacement tolerated approximately 20% more
exposure time (including rest periods spent in the heat chamber) and
approximately 25% more work time (calculated by excluding rest periods)
than those without the fluid replacement. Most participants who were
not provided fluids ended the trial upon experiencing lightheadedness
when attempting to re-initiate exercise after a break, possibly related
to low blood pressure. Those with two-thirds and full fluid replacement
took significantly longer to reach an end point during work time and
those with one-third, two-thirds, or full fluid replacement had
significantly longer exposure time than those without fluid
replacement. The full fluid replacement group also had higher rectal
temperatures at their trial endpoint compared to those without fluid
replacement, possibly indicating that hydration allowed them to
tolerate higher rectal temperatures. The authors state that these
findings are consistent with previous literature that reports
cardiovascular function to be compromised without fluid replacement,
leading to exhaustion at lower core temperatures.
Ioannou et al. (2021a) advised intervention groups made up of
agricultural workers in Qatar and construction workers in Qatar and
Spain to consume 750 milliliters (mL) of water supplemented by one
tablespoon of salt per hour over their work shift. Findings in the
intervention group were compared to a ``business as usual'' (BAU)
group, where workers followed their normal routine, that were
unspecified for the agricultural industry and included shaded areas,
water stations, and air-conditioned rest break areas for construction
workers in Spain; those same BAU conditions were implemented for
construction workers in Qatar, in addition to requiring workers to
carry a water bottle, and education. Results included: (1) 13% to 97%
reductions in prevalence of dehydration in each intervention group; (2)
no significant differences in core temperatures for agricultural
workers in Qatar; (3) significant reductions in core temperature in the
construction intervention groups in Qatar and Spain, and (4) mixed
findings on heart rate and skin temperature across the sites. One
limitation with this paper is the use of BAU as a control group, as it
is not always clear how these scenarios differed from the intervention.
In addition, the quantity of fluid consumed was not measured.
Drinking adequate amounts of water may also reduce the risk of
syncope. Schroeder et al. assessed the effects of water quantity on
orthostatic tolerance (as time to presyncope, the symptomatic period
right before fainting) in healthy individuals (n=13) (Schroeder et al.,
2002). The authors used a controlled, crossover design to test the
effects of consuming 500 versus 50 milliliters of water prior to
attempting to induce presyncope by tilting the head-up and applying
negative pressure to the lower body. They found that drinking the
larger amount of water improved orthostatic tolerance by 5 minutes (+/-
1 minute), increased supine (lying down face up) mean blood pressure
and peripheral resistance, and was associated with smaller increases in
heart rate. A recent study using a similar design found that the
temperature of the water may also have an influence--cold water
consumption was associated with increased systolic blood pressure,
stroke volume (i.e., increased volume of blood pumped out of heart per
beat), cerebral blood flow velocity, and total peripheral resistance,
as well as reduced heart rate relative to consuming room temperature
water (Parsons et al., 2023). They did not find differences in
orthostatic tolerance between the groups. It should be noted that
neither of these papers tested the participants under conditions of
high heat, but as is discussed in Section IV., Health Effects, research
has shown that exposure to heat independently increases the risk of
syncope. In addition, both syncope from exposure to heat and the method
used to induce presyncope in these studies can involve a mechanism in
which blood pools in the lower body.
Public health guidance for workers (e.g., from NIOSH) often
involves recommendations that workers consume 1 cup (237 mL) of water
every 15-20 minutes or approximately 1 liter (711-948 mL) per hour. The
goal is to replenish fluids lost through sweat and avoid a substantial
loss in total body water content. Sweat rates vary between individuals
and conditions. Research conducted among workers performing ``moderate
manual labor e.g., mining or construction work'' in a controlled
laboratory setting (35 [deg]C and 50% RH) demonstrated an average sweat
rate of 410-470 mL per hour (depending on whether the trial was
conducted in winter or summer), but a range of 100 mL to 1 liter per
hour during the presumed unacclimatized trials (conducted in winter)
(Bates and Miller, 2008). These recommendations are also in line with
the Army's fluid replacement guidelines, which recommend 0.75-1 quart
(1 quart is approximately 0.95 liters) per hour for ``moderate work''
(425 W) to ``heavy work'' (600 W) depending on the wet bulb globe
temperature (Department of the Army, April 12, 2022; Table 3-2).
In a randomized crossover study, Pryor et al. (2023) had
participants continuously walk for two hours at 6.4 km/hr in a heat
chamber (34 [deg]C/93.2 [deg]F, 30% relative humidity) while either
drinking 500 mL of water every 40 minutes or 237 mL of water every 20
minutes, followed by two hours of rest. Study authors found both
hydration strategies to be similarly effective based on (1) no
significant differences in body mass, percent change in plasma volume,
plasma osmolality (i.e., volume of particles dissolved in plasma), body
temperature, or heart rate and (2) no difference in thirst or total
gastrointestinal symptom scores. The authors did note, however, that
urine volume was significantly lower after the rest period in the group
receiving 237 mL of water every 20 minutes compared to the group
receiving 500 mL of water every 40 minutes.
Several studies have evaluated the impact of the temperature of
drinking water on dehydration and other measures in occupational
settings. Cold water may serve as a heat sink to cool off the body in
addition to combatting dehydration. In their meta-analysis, Morris et
al. (2020) (described above) considered the effect of cold fluid
ingestion as a personal cooling method, distinct from maintaining
hydration status. Morris and co-authors concluded that cold fluid
ingestion was effective as a heat strain mitigation control.
A systematic review by Burdon et al. reported that palatability was
higher for
[[Page 70758]]
cold (32.0-50.0 [deg]F) or cool (50.0-71.6 [deg]F) beverages, as
compared to warmer (greater than 71.6 [deg]F) beverages, during
exercise (Burdon et al., 2012). The authors conducted a meta-analysis
using data from five studies and found that participants drank roughly
50% more cold/cool beverages than warmer beverages. Another analysis of
multiple studies found that when participants were provided cold/cool
beverages rather than warmer ones, there was less of a mismatch between
fluid intake and fluid lost through sweat (measured as percentage of
body mass lost). Participants provided warmer beverages lost, on
average, 1.3% more of their body mass (95% CI: 0.9%, 1.6%) (Burdon et
al., 2012).
I. Conclusions for Water
In conclusion, one experimental study reported that drinking
adequate amounts of water while exercising in high heat prolonged the
time of exposure before experiencing signs of heat strain or HRI
(McLellan and Selkirk, 2006). In addition, studies in which
participants were not exposed to high temperatures found that drinking
adequate amounts of water reduced the risk of laboratory-induced
presyncope (Schroeder et al., 2002), and drinking cool water improved
cardiovascular function (Parsons et al., 2023). Studies have also
reported increased palatability for cool or cold beverages (<=71.6
[deg]F) that is likely to increase consumption and prevent dehydration
compared to warmer beverages (Burdon et al., 2012).
Based on these studies, OSHA preliminarily finds that drinking
adequate amounts of water is an effective intervention for preventing
heat strain that could lead to HRI, and that providing cool drinking
water is especially beneficial. In addition, because cool or cold water
was found to be more palatable than warm water, OSHA preliminarily
finds that providing cool or cold water can lead to higher consumption
of water and thereby reduce the risk of dehydration.
E. Acclimatization
Heat acclimatization refers to the improvement in heat tolerance
that occurs from gradually increasing the intensity and/or duration of
work done in a hot setting. There are several studies examining the
extent and effectiveness of acclimatization achieved on the job. The
effects of acclimatization in allowing individuals to work safely in
higher temperatures than unacclimatized individuals has been
established for decades and is reflected by both the NIOSH REL and the
ACGIH TLV (NIOSH, 2016; ACGIH, 2023).
Early research on the effectiveness of acclimatization was
conducted in the 1950s and 1960s among gold mine workers in South
Africa (Weiner, 1950; Wyndham et al., 1954, 1966). Weiner (1950)
conducted three days of heat stress tests on eight acclimatized mine
workers, with three to six months experience working underground, and
eight new, unacclimatized workers. Workers completed a four-hour
protocol of step climbing sessions (30 mins) with sitting breaks (30
mins) in a mine shaft (dry bulb temperatures: 89.8 [deg]F-90.2 [deg]F,
wet bulb temperatures: 88.8 [deg]F-89.1 [deg]F, air movement: 165-280
ft/min). Multiple unacclimatized workers were not able to complete the
full protocol on the first day (based on symptomology, heart rate and
rectal temperature), while all acclimatized workers were able to do so.
Rectal temperatures and heart rates were higher among the
unacclimatized workers than the acclimatized workers and sweat rate was
lower (Weiner 1950).
Wyndham et al. (1954) describe a two-stage acclimatization protocol
in which workers (n=110) shoveled rock for six days in a cooler section
of the mine (saturated air temperature approximately 86.5 [deg]F, wind
velocity approximately 100 feet/minute), before moving to a hot section
of the mine (saturated air temperature between 91.5 [deg]F and 92.0
[deg]F, wind velocity 100 to 350 feet/minute) to complete the same task
for six more days (Wyndham et al., 1954). Researchers measured rectal
temperatures before the shift, at 9 a.m., at 11 a.m., and at 1 p.m. on
each of the twelve days. Average rectal temperature was 101.0 [deg]F on
the first day in the cooler conditions, which fell to 100.2 [deg]F on
day six. When workers transitioned to the hot conditions, the average
rectal temperature was 100.8 [deg]F on the first day and 100.0 [deg]F
on the sixth day. The authors concluded that the acclimatization method
was a success, as rectal temperatures were on average lower on the
first day in full heat conditions (100.8 [deg]F) than on the first day
of work in cooler conditions (101.0 [deg]F), and mean work output was
also higher on the first day in the full heat (Wyndham et al., 1954).
The researchers also compared the acclimatized workers to a prior
cohort of eight new workers who worked immediately in hot conditions
without any acclimatization--they had an average rectal temperature of
101.8 [deg]F on their first day. The authors noted that the two-stage
acclimatization protocol likely resulted in complete acclimatization,
as earlier monitoring of the eight new workers over 23 workdays showed
that rectal temperatures did not fall much lower than 100 [deg]F, the
average temperature seen after the new two-phase acclimatization
protocol (Wyndham et al., 1954).
In a later study, Wyndham et al. (1966) analyzed the rectal
temperatures of 18 acclimatized men and groups of 20 unacclimatized men
working at a moderate rate for four hours in varying environmental
conditions (Wyndham et al., 1966). The authors found that the
acclimatized men, on average, could work at higher effective
temperatures (a heat metric that accounts for ambient temperature,
humidity, and air movement) than the unacclimatized men while still
maintaining a steady rectal temperature (Wyndham et al., 1966).
Van der Walt and Strydom analyzed fatal heat stroke cases among
miners in South Africa from 1930-1974 (Van der Walt and Strydom, 1975).
Changes in cooling, mechanization, and acclimatization practices
occurred at different points in time. Van der Walt and Strydom divided
1930-1974 into four periods based on interventions implemented during
each period. They discussed changes in heat stroke fatality in relation
to the interventions that were implemented. During the earliest period
(1930-1939), acclimatization practices were introduced and ventilation
improved, and the annual heat stroke mortality rate decreased from 93
to 44 deaths/100,000 workers. During the following period, which
coincided with the war and post-war time (1940-1949), mines continued
and improved the practices introduced in the first period. There was a
drop in mortality rate from approximately 26 to 16 deaths/100,000
workers. During the third period (1950-1965), mines began using two-
stage acclimatization, and the annual heat stroke mortality rate
decreased from 15 to 5.6 deaths/100,000 workers. During the fourth
period (1966-1974), mines began using climatic room acclimatization,
and the annual heat stroke mortality rate decreased even further to 2.3
deaths/100,000 workers (Van der Walt and Strydom, 1975). The authors
concluded that the controls they implemented over this period--namely
introducing and improving their acclimatization procedures--were
important in reducing the heat stroke fatality rates over time.
However, they also introduced other controls during this time
(ventilation and mechanization) so it is difficult to determine the
efficacy of acclimatization independent of those controls (and other
potential confounding factors).
[[Page 70759]]
Recent research on acclimatization has also included studies that
assess acclimatization achieved while on the job. Lui et al. (2014)
conducted a study to evaluate acclimatization among firefighters before
and after a four-month wildland fire season, in May and September,
respectively. The researchers assessed various physiological markers of
heat acclimatization among a cohort of 12 U.S. male wildland
firefighters and a group of 14 adults who were not firefighters,
matched on age and fitness level. Participants completed a 60-minute
walk at 50% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2) in a chamber at 43.3
[deg]C and 33% relative humidity. At 60 minutes, firefighters were
found to have lower average core body temperatures after the wildfire
season than before the season (after: 38.2 [deg]C 0.4;
before: 38.5 [deg]C 0.3), while the comparison group
showed no difference from the pre-season to post-season trials.
Similarly, firefighters had significantly lower physiological strain
index scores (a variable derived from core temperature and heart rate)
after the wildfire season (p<0.05), while scores did not change for the
comparison group. No pre- to post-season changes were observed for
heart rate. The authors found no evidence of acclimatization in the
comparison group over the study period. Study results suggest that the
firefighters were acclimatized due to occupational exposures during the
wildfire season rather than exposure to higher seasonal heat (Lui et
al., 2014).
Dang and Dowell (2014) compared heat strain markers among
acclimatized and unacclimatized potroom workers at an aluminum smelter
in Texas in July as they conducted various smelting activities in high
heat. Workers were defined as unacclimatized if they had not been
working or had been working solely outside of the potrooms for four or
more consecutive days in the prior two weeks. WBGT values in work areas
ranged from 83 [deg]F to 120 [deg]F. Among the eight unacclimatized
workers and 48-50 acclimatized workers with heat strain measurements,
unacclimatized workers had significantly higher average heart rates
than acclimatized workers (118 bpm vs. 107 bpm, p<0.01). Unacclimatized
workers also had higher average and average maximum core temperatures,
but these differences were not significantly different (average maximum
core temperature: 101.0 [deg]F vs. 100.7 [deg]F; average core
temperature: 99.7 [deg]F vs. 99.6 [deg]F) (Dang and Dowell, 2014).
Watkins et al. (2019) evaluated the heat tolerance of fire service
instructors (FSIs), which researchers describe as fire personnel who
provide firefighting training courses and have more frequent fire
exposure than firefighters. The researchers conducted two heat
tolerance tests, separated by two months on a cohort of 11 FSIs and 11
unexposed controls (university lecturers), matched on age, sex, and
body composition. Controls had not had more than three consecutive days
of heat exposure (<25 [deg]C) or taken part in heat acclimatization
training in the month prior to the study. On average, FSIs experienced
five fire exposures in the two weeks prior to each heat tolerance test.
Each test was composed of a 10-minute rest period (22.9
1.2 [deg]C, 31.2 6.8% RH) followed by a 40-minute walk in
a heat chamber (50 1.0 [deg]C, 12.3 3.3% RH)
wearing fire protective equipment. At the end of the first heat
tolerance test, FSIs on average had significantly lower maximum rectal
temperature (-0.42 [deg]C, p<0.05), less change in rectal temperature
(-0.33 [deg]C, p<0.05), and reported less thermal sensation and, among
males only, a higher sweat rate (+0.25 Liters/hour, p<0.05) than the
controls. Heart rate, skin temperature, and physiological strain index
did not differ between groups. Rectal temperature at the end of the
heat test was negatively correlated with the number of fire exposures
experienced in the prior two weeks (r= -0.589, p=0.004) (Watkins et
al., 2019).
The effectiveness of acclimatization in high heat conditions has
also been an important topic for militaries. Charlot et al. (2017)
studied the effects of training on acclimatization in 60 French
soldiers who arrived in United Arab Emirates (UAE) in May of 2016, and
were not stationed in a hot climate over the previous year. On day 1,
all soldiers completed a heat stress test while running. On days 2-6,
the 30 soldiers in the training group trained outdoors by running at
50% VO2 max, with durations of training sessions ranging from 32-56
minutes. Both the soldiers in the training group and 30 soldiers in a
control group (no training; performed usual activities) spent
approximately six hours outdoors per day conducting standard military
tasks. The heat stress test was repeated on day 7, with WBGTs ranging
from 1.1 [deg]C warmer to 0.9 [deg]C cooler compared to day 1. In both
groups, rectal temperature, heart rate, sweat loss, sweat osmolality,
perceived exertion, and thermal discomfort were lower after the stress
test on day 7 compared to day 1. Compared to the control group, the
training group had significantly greater decreases in heart rate (20
13 bpm lower versus 13 6 bpm lower), rate of
perceived exertion, and thermal discomfort after the stress test on day
7 compared to day 1. Charlot et al. (2017) concluded that addition of
short, moderate-intensity training sessions resulted in further heat
acclimatization, beyond the acclimatization observed across all
participants.
In another study of military trainees, Lim et al. (1997) assessed
the degree to which passive heat exposure and military training
resulted in the acclimatization of army recruits in Singapore across a
16-week military training program. Participants completed a heat stress
test, while marching, at four time points: (1) before starting the
program, (2) on the second week, (3) on the sixth week and (4) on the
sixteenth/final week of the program. For the nine individuals who
attended all tests, heart rate significantly decreased across the study
period, while results for skin temperature, tympanic temperature (i.e.,
within ear canal), and average body temperature were mixed, and there
were no significant differences in sweat loss or sweat rate.
Researchers interpreted these findings to mean that passive heat
acclimatization from living in a hot climate had resulted in partial
acclimatization, but that physical conditioning was necessary for
triggering beneficial cardiovascular adaptations (Lim et al., 1997).
Sports teams have also evaluated the effectiveness of heat
acclimatization among their athletes. Three studies conducted among
professional soccer players found that athletes training in hot outdoor
conditions experienced improvements in plasma volume, heart rate,
rectal and skin temperature, and/or sweat sodium concentration over the
course of their training (Buchheit et al., 2011; Racinais et al., 2012,
2014).
Acclimation (i.e., improvement in heat tolerance under laboratory
conditions) was also studied in heat chamber studies. In a study using
90-minute treadmill sessions designed to mimic the metabolic rate of
manual laborers, Chong et al. (2020) found that over the course of a12-
day acclimatization period at 28 [deg]C WBGT or 30 [deg]C WBGT, peak
core temperature, heart rate, and skin temperature decreased and sweat
rate increased even before the end of the 12-day period (Chong et al.,
2020). Zhang and Zhu (2021) acclimated participants using 10 daily 90-
minute treadmill sessions (at a speed of 5 kilometers/hour) in 38
[deg]C and 40% RH and found that after acclimation, rectal temperature
and heart rate during exercise increased at a slower rate, but there
was no effect on
[[Page 70760]]
skin temperature. OSHA notes that Zhang and Zhu (2021) did not
gradually increase daily heat exposure, as is typically recommended.
Shvartz et al. (1977) studied the effects of work and heat on
orthostatic tolerance among 12 trained men (i.e., trained three time a
week in endurance sports) and 16 untrained men, none of whom were
exposed to exercising in the heat in the two months before testing
(Shvartz et al., 1977). The trained participants had better orthostatic
tolerance to laboratory-induced syncope compared to the untrained
participants (2 vs. 8 fainting episodes after exercise in ambient
conditions; 4 versus 9 fainting episodes after exercise in heat). Heat
acclimation improved orthostatic response, as fainting episodes after
exercise decreased in the 8 untrained participants who were later
acclimated to heat for 7 additional days (4 versus 0 fainting episodes
after exercising in temperate conditions and 4 versus 2 after
exercising in hot conditions, before and after acclimation,
respectively). At the end of the acclimation period for those 8
untrained participants, significant reductions were observed for heart
rate and rectal temperature, while significant increases in sweat rate
and maximum VO2 occurred. Shvartz et al. (1977) concluded that both
general physical fitness and heat acclimation contributed to better
orthostatic responses and fewer fainting episodes.
Parsons et al. (2023) evaluated the effects of heat acclimation in
20 endurance-trained athletes (15 males, 5 females) randomly assigned
to a heat group that was acclimated for 8 days or control group that
was not acclimated to heat. Heat stress testing (at approximately 32
[deg]C and 71% or 72% RH) revealed that in the post-intervention
period, the heat group compared to the control group, had significantly
decreased peak heart rate; resting, mean, and peak rectal temperature;
and peak and mean skin temperature. No significant differences were
observed in measures of sweat and hydration. Plasma volume was
significantly increased in the heat compared to control group post
intervention. Orthostatic tolerance (at approximately 32.0 [deg]C, 20%
RH) determined by the time to laboratory-induced presyncope, was
significantly increased in the heat group (pre: 28 9 min.
vs. post: 40 7 min.) compared to control group (pre: 30
8 min. vs. post: 33 5 min.) post-
intervention. The authors concluded that plasma volume expansion was
the likely mechanism behind improved orthostatic tolerance; they
further noted that participants were physically fit at baseline and
that they would expect a less robust acclimation regimen would likely
yield beneficial results for populations with lower physical fitness
(Parsons et al., 2023).
I. Evidence of Tenure as a Risk Factor
Multiple investigations of occupational HRIs have identified tenure
in the job as a risk factor. Workers who are new on the job are often
overrepresented in HRI and heat-related fatality reports. In many of
these cases, this apparent increased risk presumably results from not
being acclimatized to hot working conditions. Studies documenting
tenure as a risk factor include case series from OSHA reports, analyses
of State workers' compensation databases, and research on military
populations. For reference, the most recent (2023) monthly estimates of
new hires in the U.S. suggest that over the summer months (June to
September), the percent of workers who have been in their job for a
month or less ranges from 3.7%-4.1% (BLS JOLTS 2023). Therefore, the
percent of workers who are in their first day, first week, or first two
weeks on the job would be expected to be lower than 3.7%-4.1%.
Several reports have evaluated OSHA enforcement cases of HRI and
heat-related fatalities. Arbury et al. identified 20 citations
involving indoor or outdoor HRIs and fatalities cited under the general
duty clause in 2012 and 2013 (Arbury et al., 2014). Of the 13
fatalities, 4 (31%) occurred on the worker's first day on the job or
after returning from time away, while 9 (69%) occurred in the first
three days of the worker's tenure on the job. Arbury et al. expanded
this work in a follow-on report that included all of OSHA's heat
enforcement cases in both indoor and outdoor workplaces between 2012
and 2013 (n=84). Of the 23 cases involving a heat-related fatality, 17
(74%) occurred in the worker's first three days on the job and 8 (35%)
on the worker's first day (Arbury et al., 2016). Tustin et al. (2018a)
identified 66 HRI cases among OSHA enforcement investigations conducted
between 2011 and 2016 for which OSHA's Office of Occupational Medicine
and Nursing (OOMN) was consulted. Among the fatality cases with job
tenure information (n=22), 45.5% occurred on the first day of or
returning to the job and 72.8% occurred during the first week. Among
the non-fatal HRI cases with job tenure information (n=32), 3.1%
occurred on the first day and 18.7% occurred during the first week. In
a related analysis focusing on outdoor workers, Tustin et al. (2018b)
evaluated 25 outdoor occupational HRI and fatalities investigated by
OSHA between 2011 and 2016. Eleven (78.6%) of the 14 fatalities and one
of the 11 non-fatal illnesses (9.1%) occurred in workers who had
started the job within the preceding two weeks or returned from an
absence of greater than one week (Tustin et al., 2018b).
Arbury et al. 2014, Arbury et al. 2016, Tustin et al. 2018a, and
Tustin et al. 2018b are all retrospective case series that used OSHA
databases to identify cases of HRI and heat-related fatalities. As
such, they rely on previously collected information about working
conditions and worker characteristics, which may not be complete or
reflect all factors. In addition, there may be selection bias
introduced by the type of cases referred to OSHA's OOMN for review
(i.e., they may represent more severe cases).
Several studies and reports have used data from California to
describe characteristics of occupational HRI and heat-related
fatalities in the State. From May through November of 2005, there were
25 heat-related Cal/OSHA enforcement investigations (Prudhomme and
Neidhardt, 2006). When combining fatal and non-fatal outcomes, most
workers (80%) had been on the job for four or fewer days before their
HRI event, and almost half (46%) occurred on the workers' first day on
the job (Prudhomme and Neidhardt, 2006). In 2006, Cal/OSHA confirmed 46
cases of HRI in their 38 investigations of heat-related allegations (4
investigations involved more than 1 case) (Prudhomme and Neidhardt,
2007). 15% of the HRI events and fatalities occurred on the first day
of work or the first day of a heat wave, while 30% occurred after
working one to four days on the job or into a heat wave (Prudhomme and
Neidhardt, 2007). It should be noted that both Cal/OSHA reports only
capture cases investigated by Cal/OSHA, and as such, may reflect more
severe cases of HRI. They are also not expected to be exhaustive of all
occupational HRIs occurring in the State during these time periods.
Heinzerling et al. (2020) investigated occupational HRIs across
industry sectors in California from 2000 to 2017 using the California
Workers' Compensation Information System (Heinzerling et al., 2020) and
identified 15,996 cases of occupational HRI. The authors reported that
1,427 cases (8.9%) occurred within two weeks of hire and 410 (2.6%)
occurred on the first day on the job.
Several analyses of Washington State Department of Labor and
Industries (WA L&I) data have also investigated job tenure in relation
to heat-related workers' compensation claims. Bonauto
[[Page 70761]]
et al. identified 308 claims between 1995 and 2005 with information on
employment duration, 43 (14%) of which reported job tenure of one week
or less (Bonauto et al., 2007). In comparison, across all claims (i.e.,
not just heat-related) with employment duration information during the
same period, 3.3% of claims reported a job tenure of one week or less,
suggesting that this pattern is more common among heat-related claims.
A more recent analysis by WA L&I reports the percent of accepted HRI
claims occurring during the first one and two weeks of work in
Washington between 2006 and 2021 (SHARP 2022). Across all industries,
12.5% of accepted HRI claims were filed in the first week at a job and
16.1% of accepted HRI claims occurred during the first two weeks of
work. The percentage of HRI claims filed in the first week and first
two weeks of working at a job was higher than the percentage among all
workers' compensation claims filed in the first week (2.2%) or two
weeks (3.7%) on a job. Spector et al. conducted an analysis similar to
Bonauto et al. 2007, but restricted to the agriculture and forestry
sectors and included claims through 2009 (Spector et al., 2014). The
researchers identified 84 HRI claims in the agriculture and forestry
sectors, approximately 15% of which reported that claimants had been
working at their job for less than two weeks at the time of the injury.
As discussed in Section V.A., Risk Assessment, occupational HRIs,
particularly those not requiring medical treatment, are subject to
underreporting in workers' compensation systems. Therefore, injuries
and illnesses that are captured are likely to be more severe cases.
The U.S. military has also studied HRIs among its recruits
extensively. Among all U.S. Marine recruits entering basic training at
the Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island in South Carolina between
1988 and 1996, the number of HRI cases were higher in early training
periods (processing week and weeks 1-4) compared to late training
period (training weeks 5-12) for females but were similar for males
(Wallace 2003). Among males, weeks 1, 8, and 9 of training had the
highest numbers of HRI cases. Physical intensity of training varied
each week during the 12 weeks of training, which likely had an impact
on rates of HRI. Dellinger et al. reported on HRIs among more than
7,000 Army National Guard soldiers deployed to Illinois from July 5th
to August 18th, 1993, in response to severe flooding (Dellinger et al.,
1996). Researchers identified 23 heat-related medical claims, which
excluded those treated by on-site first aid. 65% of the 23 HRI claims
occurred during the first two weeks of the deployment; researchers note
that this was also the period of greatest work intensity.
II. Conclusions for Acclimatization
In conclusion, numerous studies have reported the benefits of heat
acclimatization for employees in workplace settings. For example,
adoption of workplace acclimatization protocols was followed by reduced
rates of heat stroke-related fatalities in South African miners (Van
der Walt and Strydom, 1975). Acclimatization was also reported to
result in reduced signs of heat strain or improved physiological
responses to heat for miners (Weiner, 1950; Wyndham et al., 1966), fire
fighters (Lui et al., 2014; Watkins et al., 2019) and aluminum smelter
potroom workers (Dang and Dowell, 2014). Similarly, studies in military
personnel have reported responses to heat following physical training
in hot climates (Charlot et al., 2017; Lim et al., 1997). Improvements
in physiological responses to heat were also observed in athletes after
training in hot climates (Buchheit et al., 2011; Racinais et al., 2012,
2014) and participants exercising in heat chambers (Chong et al., 2020;
Zhang and Zhu, 2021). Studies have also shown that heat acclimation
while exercising reduces the risk of laboratory-induced syncope
(Shvartz et al., 1977) or presyncope (Parsons et al., 2023).
Additionally, retrospective examination of limited data from State
and Federal enforcement and surveillance cases demonstrates over-
representation of workers during the first days or weeks of employment
or return to work among HRI cases and fatalities (Arbury et al., 2014,
2016; Tustin et al., 2018a, b; Prudhomme and Neidhardt, 2006, 2007;
Heinzerling et al., 2020; Bonauto et al., 2007; SHARP, 2022). This
suggests that these workers are at increased risk of HRI and fatality,
which may be (or at least in part) the result of lack of
acclimatization.
Based on the evidence presented in this section, OSHA preliminarily
finds acclimatization to be an effective intervention in reducing the
risk of HRI and heat-related fatality by improving physiological
responses to heat.
IV. Evidence on the Effectiveness of Multicomponent Interventions
A. Civilian Workers
OSHA identified a small number of studies that examined the
effectiveness of multi-pronged interventions implemented at workplaces.
Three evaluated the effectiveness of a multi-pronged intervention at
reducing the risk of heat-related illness (McCarthy et al., 2019;
Perkison et al., 2024) or self-reported symptoms of heat-related
illness (Bodin et al., 2016) by comparing the same study population
before and after an intervention was implemented. OSHA does note that
the studies lacked a control group which received no intervention and
would have allowed for the authors to examine the effect of potential
temporal confounders that changed across the study period. In addition,
there was no data to indicate how thoroughly the interventions were
implemented or how much employees adhered to them. However, the studies
provide strong and consistent evidence of the effectiveness of multi-
intervention programs in preventing heat-related illnesses and are
supported on a mechanistic basis by the laboratory and other
experimental evidence presented above.
McCarthy et al. (2019) compared HRI events and costs from workers'
compensation data before and after a Heat Stress Awareness Program
(HSAP) intervention among workers in a mid-sized city in Central Texas
that was implemented in March 2011. The study population consisted of
municipal workers whose jobs involved work in hot, humid conditions
with moderate to heavy physical demands, excluding firefighters. The
HSAP was based on NIOSH's Criteria for a Recommended Standard:
Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot Environments (2016) and included
in-person training of supervisors and workers, a medical monitoring
program, and specific recommendations to supervisors such as providing
unlimited access to water, sports drinks, and shade, as well as
establishing acclimatization schedules, work-rest procedures, and first
aid protocols. Before the intervention, workers completed a self-
administered questionnaire to determine their level of HRI risk, which
the researchers then used to categorize them into four risk levels
(McCarthy et al., 2019). Those who reported two or more HRI risk
factors (i.e., high body mass index, medication use, chronic illnesses,
alcohol and energy drink use, history of prior HRI, work in a second
hot job, and extensive skin pathology) but not an ``unstable health
condition'' received individualized HRI prevention counseling or
education.
McCarthy et al. (2019) compared the rates of heat-related illness
across the study period of 2009-2017, before and after the HSAP
intervention was implemented in 2011. In the pre-intervention period
(2009-2010), the
[[Page 70762]]
annual average claim rate for heat-related illnesses was 25.5 claims/
1,000 workers. The average annual rate of HRI claims in fell by 37% in
2012-2014 (16 claims/1,000 workers) and by 96% in 2015-2017 (1 claim/
1,000 workers) compared to the pre-intervention period. No workers'
compensation claims for HRI were submitted in the final 2 years of the
study period.
OSHA observes the potential for healthy worker selection bias in
this study that might have occurred if employees with medical
conditions were more likely to leave their job and therefore the cohort
during the study period.
Perkison et al. (2024) reported that the program in the central
Texas Municipality employees (referred to in this study as the heat
illness prevention program (HIPP)) and described by McCarthy et al.
2019) ended in 2017 and was replaced by a modified HIPP (mHIPP) that
included only employee and supervisor training and employee
acclimatization. In an analysis to determine the impact of dropping
medical surveillance from the HIPP, the study authors reported that the
rate of heat illness and injury, which averaged 19.5/1,000 employees
during the first four years of the HIPP (2011-2014), fell to 1.0/1,000
employees over the next three years (2015-2017), but increased to 7.6
per 1,000 workers during the mHIPP (2018-2019). Although heat-related
illness claim rates increased during implementation of the mHIPP, the
rate of heat-related illness during implementation of the mHIPP (7.6/
1,000) was still 70% lower than the period with no intervention (25.5/
1,000).
Bodin et al. (2016) reported on productivity, HRI symptoms, and
hydration practices before and after a water-rest-shade (WRS) and
efficiency intervention among sugarcane cutters in El Salvador. The
intervention began two months into the 5-month harvest season of 2014-
2015. The WRS intervention included: 3-liter water bladders carried in
backpacks and refilled during breaks; an initial 1.5 to 2-hour work
interval followed by a 10 to 15-minute break, then hour-long work
periods with 10 to 15-minute rest breaks and a 45-minute lunch break;
and a portable shade canopy for breaks. The efficiency intervention
consisted of a machete with an improved blade and handle, fewer rows
cut, and a stacking method to reduce workload. Due to challenges during
data collection, a relatively small sample size of 41 workers completed
follow-up. Bodin et al. (2016) reported that, among those 41 sugarcane
cutters, average daily water intake (5.1 liters pre-intervention, 6.3
liters post-intervention) and average daily production (5.1 tons pre,
7.3 tons post) increased after the intervention. An analysis of self-
reported heat stress and dehydration-associated symptoms showed that
reporting of most symptoms decreased after the intervention, such as
feeling feverish (40% to 10%), exhaustion (37% to 14%), nausea (35% to
12%), very dry mouth (49% to 26%), very little urine (37% to 19%),
cramps (30% to 17%), diarrhea (14% to 0%), disorientation (12% to 0%),
and fainting (5% to 2%). However, self-reported rates of vomiting (9%
to 10%) and dysuria (i.e., pain during urination) (42% to 45%) remained
similar in pre- and post-intervention periods (Bodin et al., 2016)
(Communication with David Wegman, November 2023).
B. Military Personnel
OSHA also identified studies which examined the effectiveness of
interventions in reducing risk of heat-related illness among military
personnel. OSHA acknowledges differences between military personnel and
typical civilian worker populations, such as health status, fitness
levels, and the types of physical activities performed by military
personnel (e.g., long-distance running). The military also employs
certain controls that aren't typically used in workplaces, such as work
stoppage criteria. However, OSHA finds the studies in military
personnel useful for showing that multi-component interventions can
reduce the risk of heat-related illness.
Kerstein et al. (1986) conducted a randomized control trial in
military reservists exposed to hot and humid conditions and found that
the incidence of heat illness was 54% lower in a group exposed to
intervention measures. Those measures included a lecture on water as
prevention, training on and use of portable WBGT monitors, and a
special briefing for Commanding Officers. Incidence rates of HRI
(defined as ``any person with heat symptoms, including exhaustion,
cramps, and headaches that the corpsman could clearly relate to the
environment and cause the individual to be non-functional for at least
one hour or more'') were 13 out of 306 participants in the intervention
group (4.2%) and 20 out of 220 in the control group (9.1%).
Stonehill and Keil examined the number of heat stroke cases at
Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas after they implemented a
series of interventions over a period from 1956 through 1959 (Stonehill
and Keil, 1961). Interventions that were implemented before 1958
included education on heat illness and prevention, pausing training
based on dry bulb temperatures, shifting harder exercises to cooler
hours, treating heat rash, providing clothing with better ventilation,
improving personal hygiene, providing special advice for overweight
individuals, and implementing immediate medical treatment for heat
stroke. Despite these measures, they still observed 39 cases of heat
stroke in 1957 (a rate of 0.87/1,000). After making improvements to
their prevention measures in the summer of 1958 (increased water and
salt tablet availability, removing fatigue shirts inside classrooms,
using WBGT to determine when to pause training, and avoiding intense
outdoor training in the first week of training), they observed only 2
heat stroke cases that summer (a rate of 0.05/1,000), a reduction of
95% from 1957.
Minard (1961) evaluated the effectiveness of interventions in
reducing HRIs in a study of the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in Parris
Island, South Carolina. During the summer of 1952, the mean weakly HRI
incidence rate was 53 per 10,000 recruits. A program to address HRI was
adopted in 1954 and later modified in 1956. Minard reported a lower
mean weekly HRI rate with the enhanced interventions in 1956 (4.7 per
10,000 recruits) compared to the initial intervention in 1955 (12.4 per
10,000 recruits), despite higher temperatures in 1956. Initial
interventions included curtailing physical activity during high heat
and numerous behavioral changes, such as modifications to uniforms and
leadership training; while the most substantial changes to enhance the
interventions included curtailing physical activity based on WBGT and
differentiating physical activity guidance for acclimatized versus
unacclimatized recruits. Later enhancements to the intervention
included conditioning recruits with substandard fitness, shade for
outdoor classrooms, cooling for indoor classrooms, modification of the
clothing policy to allow for only t-shirts, light duty status for
recently vaccinated recruits, one hour rest or classroom instruction
after meals, better ventilation in barracks to improve sleep, and
strategies to increase water and salt intake. The mean weekly HRI rate
for all summers with the enhanced intervention (1956-1960) was 4.3 per
10,000 recruits. Four fatalities from heat stroke occurred from 1951 to
1953, but no fatalities occurred since 1953.
[[Page 70763]]
C. Conclusions for Multicomponent Interventions in Civilian and
Military Employees
In conclusion, three studies in civilian worker populations found
that multicomponent heat stress interventions reduced the incidence of
HRI claims and self-reported heat strain and dehydration symptoms and
increased work output. The findings of these studies are supported by
studies among military personnel, which also found multicomponent
interventions to be effective in reducing incidence of HRI, as well as
data on the effectiveness of individual control measures reported in
laboratory and experimental studies, which are summarized above. The
findings of these multicomponent intervention studies are summarized in
table V-3.
Table V-3--Summary of Evidence of the Effectiveness of Multicomponent
Interventions in Reducing HRIs and Heat-Related Symptoms
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evidence Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multi-component Interventions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
McCarthy et al. (2019): In a comparison The program involved
of heat-related illness claims before medical monitoring and
and after the implementation of a heat training.
stress awareness program that began in Recommendations made
2011 in a Texas municipality, the to supervisors included
average annual rate of HRI claims fell unlimited access to water,
[by 37%] in 2012-2014 (16 claims/1,000 sports drinks, and shade, as
workers) and [by 96%] in 2015-2017 (1 well as establishing
claim/1,000 workers) compared to the acclimatization schedules,
pre-intervention period (25.5 claims/ work/rest procedures, and
1,000 workers). first aid protocols.
It is not known if and
to what extent recommendations
were implemented.
Perkison et al. (2024). The program in The study authors
Texas municipality workers reported by concluded ``medical
McCarthy et al. (2019) was modified in surveillance may be an
2017 to include only training and important component in
acclimatization, and no longer include lowering workforce heat-
medical surveillance. Rate of heat- related illness,'' but noted
related illness did increase after the small sample size and
these changes (to 7.6 claims/1,000 short evaluation period.
workers) but remained [70%] lower than
when no program was implemented.
Bodin et al. (2016) reported that three Most of the
months after implementation of interventions were consistent
interventions, self-reported heat with the main interventions of
stress and dehydration-associated the proposed standard (i.e.,
symptoms decreased as follows: feeling providing drinking water, and
feverish (40% to 10% [[darr]76%]), shaded rest breaks and a lunch
exhaustion (37% to 14% [[darr]62%]), break).
nausea (35% to 12% [[darr]66%]), very Ergonomic improvements
dry mouth (49% to 26% [[darr]46%]), were also implemented.
very little urine (37% to 19% [[darr] Non-U.S. workers (El
49%]), cramps (30% to 17% Salvador) in sugar cane
[[darr]45%]), diarrhea (14% to 0% industry.
[[darr]100%]), disorientation (12% to
0% [[darr]100%]), and fainting (4.7%
to 2.4% [49%]) Rates of vomiting and
dysuria were similar.
Kerstein et al. (1986) reported a [54%] Military study.
decrease in heat illnesses in military Intervention: A
reservists after an intervention. lecture on water as
prevention, training on and
use of portable WBGT monitors,
and a special briefing for
Commanding Officers.
Stonehill and Keil (1961) reported the Military study.
number of heat stroke cases and the Intervention being
number of troops in the summers of tested: In addition to
1957 and 1958, before and after existing prevention measures,
additional protective measures were they added increased water and
implemented. salt tablet availability,
The heat stroke rate in summer removing fatigue shirts inside
1958 after implementing additional classrooms, using WBGT to
protective measures was [95%] lower determine when to pause
[0.05/1,000 troops] than the summer training, and avoiding intense
before [0.87/1,000 troops]. outdoor training in the first
week of training.
Minard (1961) study of military Military study.
recruits: Examples of
The rate of HRI after intervention measures:
implementation of the program (12.4/ curtailing physical activity
10,000 recruits) was [77%] lower than during high heat,
before the program was implemented (53/ modifications to uniforms,
10,000) recruits. leadership training,
The rate of HRI after enhanced curtailing physical activity
interventions (4.7 per 10,000 based on WBGT, differentiating
recruits) was [62%] lower than the physical activity guidance for
rate after initial interventions (12.4 acclimatized versus
per 10,000 recruits) and [91%] lower unacclimatized recruits,
than the period before the program (53/ conditioning recruits with
10,000). substandard fitness, shade for
outdoor classrooms, cooling
for indoor classrooms,
modification of the clothing
policy to allow for only t-
shirts, light duty status for
recently vaccinated recruits,
one hour rest or classroom
instruction after meals,
better ventilation in barracks
to improve sleep, and
strategies to increase water
and salt intake.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbers in brackets calculated and rounded by OSHA.
V. Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations' Requirements and
Recommendations
A number of governmental and non-governmental organizations
recommend or require heat injury and illness prevention programs or
multiple controls to address risks related to occupational heat
exposure. This shows that OSHA's proposal continues to reflect the
growing consensus that HRIs can be avoided or minimized when employers
address conditions that have been shown to increase the risk of HRI.
OSHA's proposal also continues to reflect a consensus that, to be most
effective, an HRI prevention program should incorporate multiple
interventions.
A. Governmental Requirements and Recommendations
As of April 2024, five States had heat injury and illness
prevention standards, reflecting a recognition by these States that
certain measures can reduce heat-related risks posed to workers. These
standards have many of the same types of controls OSHA is proposing
(e.g., a written heat safety plan, emergency response protocols, rest
breaks, training on HRI recognition and prevention). For a more
detailed discussion of existing State standards see Section III.,
Background. In addition, numerous States have published heat illness
and injury prevention guidance for workers.
NIOSH has issued a number of guidance products and provided expert
[[Page 70764]]
advice on heat injury and illness prevention and developed a
programmatic approach to reduce the risks associated with heat for
workers. For example, in 2016, NIOSH updated its Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments, first published in 1972 and updated in 1986, stating,
``compliance with this recommended standard should prevent or greatly
reduce the risk of adverse health effects to exposed workers.'' NIOSH
recommends that employers ``establish and implement a written program
to reduce exposures to or below the applicable RAL or REL'' (which
considers exposure to environmental heat and metabolic heat (i.e., work
intensity) for unacclimatized and acclimatized employees, respectively)
with engineering and work practice controls. Examples of engineering
controls include ventilation to increase air movement, air-
conditioning, screening, and insulation. Examples of administrative
controls include rest breaks to decrease exposure time and metabolic
heat loads, increasing distance from radiant sources, and implementing
acclimatization protocols, health and safety training, medical
screening for heat intolerance, and a heat alert program. If
engineering and administrative controls do not reduce exposure below
the applicable RAL or REL, NIOSH also recommends cooling clothing/PPE.
NIOSH states, ``the reduction of adverse health effects can be
accomplished by the proper application of engineering and work practice
controls, worker training and acclimatization, measurements and
assessment of heat stress, medical monitoring, and proper use of heat-
protective clothing and personal protective equipment (PPE)'' (NIOSH,
2016).
In another example of NIOSH guidance, NIOSH investigated a number
of heat-related workplace fatalities to assess the hazards and propose
recommendations for preventing similar fatalities, as part of the
Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Program. In four heat
fatality investigations that affected landscapers (NIOSH, 2015), farm
workers (NIOSH, 2007), firefighters (NIOSH, 1997), and construction
laborers (NIOSH, 2004), collective recommendations related to heat
included: development, implementation and training on a safety and
health program that is made available to all workers; providing rest
breaks and accessible hydration; training workers and supervisors on
recognizing HRI; providing prompt medical assistance for HRI;
monitoring of worker symptoms by supervisors; implementing
acclimatization programs; informing workers of drinks (e.g., alcoholic)
that can increase risk; having medical providers inform workers taking
certain drugs or with certain medical conditions of their increased
risk; and factoring in clothing and weather to determine firefighter
workloads.
Additionally, there is a recognition amongst other Federal
regulatory agencies that employers can implement control measures to
reduce heat-related risks and harms. The Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) first published heat guidance for mines in 1976,
and most recently published ``Heat Stress in Mining'' which provides
guidance on reducing heat stress (MSHA, 2012). The report states that a
combination of engineering controls, administrative controls and work
practices, and PPE can reduce heat and prevent employee's core
temperatures from rising. MSHA recommendations include mine planning to
provide cool rest areas, implementing exhaust ventilation and air-
conditioning in mines, using canopies in the sun, using skillful
blasting procedures to reduce excessive heat, using automation/remote
controls to reduce metabolic heat, implementing work-rest regimens with
frequent breaks, pacing work tasks, performing heavy tasks in cooler
areas or at cooler times, rotating personnel through hot work tasks,
providing readily accessible, cooler rest areas and drinking water,
acclimatizing new and returning employees, and ensuring employees and
supervisors are knowledgeable about heat related topics such as risk,
prevention, and symptoms.
In 1993, the EPA published ``A Guide to Heat Stress Management in
Agriculture'' to ``help private and commercial applicators and
agricultural employers protect their workers from heat illness'' (EPA,
1993). The guide outlines the development of a basic program to control
heat stress which includes: designating one person to manage the heat
stress program; training workers and supervisors on heat illness
prevention; acclimatizing workers when they begin to work under hot
conditions; evaluating weather conditions, workload, necessary
protective equipment or garments, and the physical condition of the
employee; managing work activities by setting up rest breaks, rotating
tasks among workers, and scheduling heavy work for cooler hours;
establishing a drinking water program; taking additional measures such
as providing special cooling garments, shade or air-conditioned mobile
equipment; and giving first aid when workers become ill (EPA, 1993).
In 2023, the U.S. Army updated its Training and Doctrine Command
(TRADOC) Army Regulation 350-29 which ``prescribes policy and provides
guidance to commanders in preventing environmental (heat or cold)
casualties.'' It includes requirements for rest in shade and water
consumption according to specific WBGT levels and work intensity, and
consideration of heat stress when planning training events (Department
of the Army, June 15, 2023). In 2022, the U.S. Department of the Army
issued the technical heat stress bulletin ``TB MED 507: Heat Stress
Control and Casualty Management'' that contains measures to prevent
indoor and outdoor HRIs in soldiers, with recommendations for
acclimatization planning, work-rest cycles, fluid and electrolyte
replacement, and cooling methods (e.g., shade, fans for prevention, and
iced sheets and ice water immersion for treatment) (Department of the
Army, April 12, 2022).
The U.S. Department of the Navy has published additional guidance
on heat injury and illness prevention particular to naval conditions
(Department of the Navy, 2023). When Navy personnel are ``afloat'',
they use Physiological Heat Exposure Limits (PHEL) curves to manage
heat stress based on exposure limits/stay times for acclimatized
personnel under various conditions of environmental heat and work
intensity. The PHEL curves were designed to allow core body temperature
to rise to 102.2 [deg]F (39 [deg]C) among healthy and acclimatized
individuals who have rested and recovered from prior heat exposures.
In 2023, the Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group of the
National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH)
presented to OSHA recommendations on potential elements of a proposed
heat injury and illness prevention standard. The Work Group recommended
that OSHA include the following measures in a potential standard: a
written exposure control plan (heat illness prevention plan); training
on heat illness prevention; environmental monitoring; provision of
water, breaks, and shade or cool-down areas; other administrative
controls (e.g., rotating workers through work tasks and implementing a
communication system for regular check-ins); other engineering control
measures (e.g., ventilation, exhaust fans, and portable cool-down
mechanisms including fans, tents, shielding/
[[Page 70765]]
insulation, proactive misting); workplace practice controls (e.g.,
providing coolers with ice and scheduling work during the coolest part
of day); personal protective equipment; acclimatization procedures;
worker participation in planning activities; and emergency response
procedures (NACOSH, May 31, 2023).
B. National Non-Governmental Organizations
ACGIH first recommended a standard for heat stress in 1971 (ACGIH,
2021), and most recently updated it in 2023 (ACGIH, 2023). The TLV is a
value that is determined with the goal of maintaining thermal
equilibrium for healthy acclimatized employees and is based on WBGT
adjusted for work intensity and clothing/PPE. An action limit (AL)
considers those same factors for unacclimatized employees. ACGIH
recommends that whenever heat stress among workers is suspected (based
on factors such as environmental conditions, work demands, work-rest
patterns, and acclimatization states), employers have a Heat Stress
Management Program (HSMP) that includes written plans for ``General
Controls'' and as appropriate, ``Job Specific Controls'' (Table 5 of
the Heat Stress and Strain section of the TLV Booklet). ACGIH states
``The principal objective of a HSMP is the prevention of excessive heat
strain among workers that may result in heat-related disorders.''
General controls include environmental surveillance, medical clearance
and counseling by a healthcare provider, training, acclimatization
planning, fluid replacement, symptom monitoring, breaks in the shade,
and an emergency response plan. Job specific controls include
engineering controls (e.g., air movement, shade, radiant heat shields),
administrative controls (e.g., limiting exposure time and allowing for
enough recovery time), personal cooling, and physiological monitoring.
In 2024, the American National Standards Institute/American Society
of Safety Professionals A10 Committee (ANSI/ASSP) released the American
National Standard A10.50 Standard for Heat Stress Management in
Construction and Demolition Operations. The voluntary consensus
standard ``establishes procedures for the management of heat stress
hazards and the selection and use of appropriate controls and practices
to reduce risks presented by heat stress and prevention of heat
illnesses for all work environments.'' The standard recommends that
employers develop and implement the following: heat stress management
program; acclimatization plan; workplace surveillance/risk assessment;
provision of water and sodium electrolyte supplements; provision of
rest breaks and shaded break locations; buddy system; first aid and
emergency action plan; medical surveillance; employee participation;
implementation of heat stress controls including engineering controls
such as air-conditioning, radiant heat control (barrier), convection
controls (cooling), evaporative controls such as misting fans, and
metabolic controls (e.g., mechanical equipment or tools to reduce
metabolic demands of work tasks); administrative controls such as
scheduling for cooler times and allowing self-paced work; personal
protective equipment; and training on heat illness prevention (ANSI/
ASSP, 2024). More specific recommendations (e.g., frequency of rest
breaks; monitoring employees) are provided when certain triggers are
exceeded.
In 2021, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
finalized its Standard Guide for Managing Heat Stress and Heat Strain
in Foundries (E3279-21) which establishes ``best practices for
recognizing and managing occupational heat stress and heat strain in
foundry environments.'' The standard outlines employer responsibilities
and recommends elements for a `Heat Stress and Heat Strain Management
Program.' Employer responsibilities include evaluating temperature and
issuing heat alerts; ensuring control measures are in place; and
reviewing heat exposure incidents to implement corrective actions.
Program elements include worker preparation (i.e., only assigning
workers to tasks involving heat exposure ``who are prepared for work in
those environments and can tolerate the heat exposure associated with
the assignments'') and workplace and work preparation (i.e.,
implementing controls that reduce heat stress through process heat
emission control and ventilation of work areas, adjusting work
schedules, providing heat relief crews (e.g., crew rotation), providing
personal protective equipment, employing personal and portable cooling
devices, providing readily available water, and providing cooled
location for work break) (ASTM, 2021). The standard also recommends
employers and workers monitor heat strain and establish emergency
response protocols.
C. Conclusion on Governmental and Non-Governmental Recommendations
In closing, a number of governmental and non-governmental groups
have either promulgated regulations or published recommendations for
protecting workers from HRI. Many of those regulations or
recommendations contain components that are consistent with protections
in the proposed rule, including plans to prevent heat stress, rest
breaks in shaded or cooled areas, cool drinking water, ventilation or
cooling methods (e.g., fans exhaust), acclimatization, observation of
symptoms in workers, environmental monitoring, and emergency response
procedures. Many of these protections have been recognized for decades
as being effective in reducing the risk of HRI in workers. This shows
that OSHA's proposal continues to reflect the growing consensus that
HRIs can be avoided or minimized when employers address conditions that
have been shown to increase the risk of HRI and incorporate these
protections as part of a program that is tailored to each workplace.
VI. Conclusion
OSHA reviewed a number of studies that provided quantitative
evidence of the effectiveness of multi-component interventions in
reducing heat-related illness or HRI; the results of those studies are
summarized in table V-3 above. Studies among Texas municipality
employees show that a multi-component intervention approach reduced HRI
claims by 37 to 96 percent compared to pre-intervention levels,
depending on the period of intervention and the types of interventions
applied (McCarthy et al., 2019; Perkison et al., 2024). Implementation
of multi-component interventions in military studies resulted in
slightly lower reductions in HRI from pre- to post-intervention (54-95
percent), again depending on the types of interventions applied in
different implementation periods (Kerstein et al., 1986; Minard, 1961;
Stonehill and Keil, 1961).
OSHA acknowledges that several of the interventions implemented
among the Texas municipality employees and military personnel differ
from the interventions in the proposed standard. However, interventions
focusing on water, rest, and shade among sugar cane employees in El
Salvador resulted in similar reductions for several common (i.e.,
occurring in 30% or more of employees pre-intervention) symptoms of
heat-related illness (e.g., 45% reduction in cramps, 46% reduction in
very dry mouth, 49% reduction in very little urine, 62% reduction for
exhaustion, 66% reduction for nausea, 76% reduction for feeling
feverish) (Bodin et al., 2016; communication with David Wegman,
November 2023). Because of the small number of workers completing the
study (n=41), results
[[Page 70766]]
regarding less common symptoms (reported in less than 15% of workers
pre-intervention) are more uncertain, but Bodin et al. reported a
decrease in fainting and no incidents of diarrhea or disorientation
after the interventions were implemented. Therefore, the study by Bodin
et al. (2016) supports the finding that a multi-intervention approach
that includes several interventions in common with the proposed
standard is likely to result in substantial reductions in HRI symptoms.
Despite several limitations that were acknowledged for these multi-
intervention studies, the results for all are of a large magnitude and
consistently show effectiveness for multi-component interventions in
preventing HRIs. In addition, the results are mechanistically supported
by experimental studies showing the effectiveness of individual
interventions in preventing signs and symptoms related to heat strain.
OSHA finds the studies looking at multi-component approaches to be more
relevant for looking at quantitative reductions in HRI because each
individual component would contribute to the overall effect.
In addition to studies showing effectiveness of multi-component
interventions in preventing HRIs, two studies also show that effective
treatments are available to prevent death if heat stroke does occur. As
reported in more detail under the Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (g)(3), Heat illness and emergency response and planning,
studies examining the effectiveness of treating individuals suffering
from exertional heat stroke reported 99.8% survival in military
personnel treated with ice sheets (bed sheets soaked in water) (DeGroot
et al., 2023) and 100% survival in marathon runners doused with cold
water and massaged with ice bags (McDermott et al., 2009a).
OSHA preliminarily finds that the totality of the evidence reviewed
supports that the approach outlined in the proposed standard, which
consists of a heat injury and illness prevention plan and the
application of multiple control measures, will result in a substantial
reduction in HRIs (range: 37-96%) and heat-related fatalities (range:
99.8-100%) in employees who would be covered under the proposed
standard.
VII. Requests for Comments
For the controls proposed, OSHA requests information and comment on
the following questions and requests that stakeholders provide any
relevant data, information, or additional studies (or citations)
supporting their view, and explain the reasoning or recommendations for
including such studies:
OSHA recognizes that a number of States (e.g., California,
Oregon, Washington) have implemented standards to prevent HRIs and
heat-related fatalities among workers. OSHA is aware that there are
existing and emerging data on the efficacy of the State standards in
preventing and reducing HRIs and heat-related fatalities. OSHA welcomes
proposed analytical methods or analyses of existing data (see e.g.,
discussion in V.A., Risk Assessment of existing data sources,
www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/reports/State-OSHA-Annual-Report-(SOAR)-FY-
2022.pdf) or unpublished data that may be used to estimate the effects
of these State standards on heat-related injury, illness, and fatality
rates among workers. OSHA is also interested in comments on how to
account for the differences (some of which are significant) between the
State standards and OSHA's proposed standard in estimating efficacy of
OSHA's proposed standard. Are there studies, data, or other evidence
that demonstrate the efficacy of and/or describe employers' or workers'
experiences with these heat-specific State standards?
Has OSHA adequately identified and documented the studies
and other information relevant to its conclusion regarding the
effectiveness of these controls in reducing heat strain and the risk of
HRIs, and are there additional studies OSHA should consider?
Are there additional studies or evidence available that
identify appropriate frequencies and durations of rest breaks for
reducing heat strain and risk of HRIs?
Are OSHA's conclusions about the effectiveness of controls
in preventing HRI reasonable?
VI. Significance of Risk
As explained in Section II., Pertinent Legal Authority, prior to
the issuance of a new standard, OSHA must make a threshold finding that
a significant risk of material harm exists, and that issuance of the
new standard will substantially reduce that risk.
In Section IV., Health Effects, OSHA presents data and information
demonstrating the range of heat-related injuries and illnesses (HRIs)
that can be caused by occupational exposure to heat. This discussion
demonstrates that HRIs often result in material harm, as they are
potentially disabling, can result in lost work time, require medical
treatment or restricted work, and in certain cases, can lead to death.
In Section V., Risk Assessment, OSHA presents the best available
evidence on the risk of incurring these heat-related material health
impairments among workers in the U.S., which clearly demonstrates that
there exists a significant risk of material harm to workers from
occupational exposure to heat. As OSHA's analysis of BLS data shows,
there was an average of 40 heat-related deaths (2011-2022) and 3,389
HRIs involving days away from work (2011-2020) among U.S. workers per
year. Additionally, based on OSHA's review of workers' compensation
claim data, OSHA found that workers in sectors and industries where
they are likely exposed to heat in their job (and therefore are more
likely to be covered by this standard) have far higher estimated
incidence of HRI than the national average, indicating that the risk to
heat-exposed workers is much higher than nationwide data suggests.
Furthermore, both the annual and working lifetime incidence rates
underestimate the true risk for heat-exposed workers given
underreporting of workplace injuries and illnesses. Thus, as explained
in sections A and B below, OSHA preliminarily determines that a
significant risk of material harm from occupational exposure to
hazardous heat exists, and issuance of this standard would
substantially reduce that risk.
A. Material Harm
As discussed in Section IV., Health Effects, the risks posed by
exposure to workplace heat hazards are significant and can result in
serious HRIs or even death. As discussed in Section IV.B., General
Mechanisms of Heat-Related Health Effects, heat stress can result in
increased core body temperature and blood flow being shunted towards
the skin and away from major organs (e.g., brain, liver, kidneys) and
muscles. Sweating, which is a healthy and normal response to heat
stress, can also contribute to a reduction in circulating blood volume
if fluids are not adequately replaced. This increase in core body
temperature and reduced blood flow can lead to health effects like heat
stroke, heat exhaustion, heat syncope, and rhabdomyolysis. If not
treated promptly, heat stroke can cause permanent organ damage and lead
to death. Treatment often requires hospitalization and time away from
work (see discussion in Section IV.E., Heat Stroke). Other health
effects, such as heat exhaustion, may also require time away from work
if recommended by a medical professional. Many heat-related health
effects, such as heat cramps and heat exhaustion, can impair
[[Page 70767]]
a worker's functional capacity while on the job. Heat syncope can pose
additional dangers to workers if they are in precarious work
environments, such as on rooftops or while operating machinery. Heat
exhaustion can also rapidly progress to heat stroke if not recognized
and treated early. As discussed in Section IV.P., Heat-Related
Injuries, heat-induced impairments in functional capacity on the job
can lead to traumatic injuries, which are more likely to occur on hot
days.
The studies that OSHA relied on in Section V.A., Risk Assessment
leverage data from multiple surveillance databases (e.g., BLS SOII,
workers' compensation claims databases, and hospital discharge data)
that have inclusion criteria that OSHA preliminarily concludes would
clearly indicate that captured cases of HRIs represent material
impairment of health. For example, the estimated number of work-related
HRIs reported in the BLS SOII capture only those that involved days
away from work (Note: For 2021-2022 biennial data, SOII additionally
reports cases involving job restriction or transfer). Similarly,
hospital discharge datasets would represent only cases that involved an
emergency department visit and/or inpatient hospitalization. While
workers' compensation eligibility varies, all of the claims would
involve either a visit with a medical professional and/or lost
worktime. HRIs resulting in lost work time and/or the need for medical
care beyond first aid clearly constitute material harm.
However, HRIs constituting material harm are not limited to those
rising to the level of lost work time and/or the need to seek care from
a medical professional. Based on the evidence discussed in this and
other sections of this preamble, OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
many of the HRIs associated with workplace exposure to heat hazards
constitute material harm, even if they are not captured in the
databases OSHA relied on in its risk assessment. OSHA recognizes that
many of these HRIs may be reversible, particularly if early
intervention is provided. Nonetheless, OSHA presents evidence in
Section IV., Health Effects that these HRIs can be debilitating. In
addition to lost work time and the need for treatment by a medical
professional, HRIs can cause reduction or loss of the worker's normal
functional capacity in work tasks and loss of productivity.
Additionally, where preventive action or early treatment is not
provided, these disorders can rapidly progress to more serious
conditions, and have the potential to result in permanent damage to
organs, causing short-, medium-, and long-term health effects, or
death. Thus, while some of the health effects OSHA has identified may
not rise to the level of material harm in all cases, the agency
believes that each can be material in severe cases.
B. Significant Risk
Peer-reviewed studies and State or national statistics are
available to demonstrate the high incidence of work-related HRIs
occurring among workers exposed to heat hazards at work. Estimates of
the risk of harm confronting exposed workers can be based directly on
the rates of work-related HRIs currently being reported.
In Section V.A., Risk Assessment, of this preamble, OSHA evaluated
the risk to workers of a heat-related injury, illness, or fatality.
OSHA's analysis of BLS data indicated an annual average of 40 heat-
related deaths (2011-2022) and 3,389 HRIs involving days away from work
(2011-2020) among U.S. workers. These annual heat-related death and HRI
numbers alone clearly constitute a significant risk and are in line
with OSHA's significant risk findings in previous safety standards
(see, e.g., Confined Spaces in Construction, 80 FR 25366, 25371 (May 4,
2014); Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution;
Electrical Protective Equipment, 79 FR 20316, 20321-20322 (April 11,
2014); Cranes and Derricks in Construction, 75 FR 47906, 47913 (Aug. 9,
2010)). However, as discussed in Section V.A., Risk Assessment, many of
the sources that OSHA reviewed reported HRI data in terms of incidence
rates, and OSHA has considered these rates in assessing significant
risk, to the extent they capture populations that are actually exposed
to hazardous occupational heat.
Unfortunately, the available data is insufficient to precisely
estimate the risk to only workers who are exposed to hazardous
occupational heat. But by examining incidence estimates derived from
various datasets, including State workers' compensation systems, OSHA
was able to determine a range of HRI incidence rates among workplaces
where employees are likely to be exposed to heat in their job. In
Section V.A., Risk Assessment, OSHA identified various sector incidence
estimates of HRI over a working lifetime (i.e., 45 years), including:
234 to 1,737 cases per 100,000 workers in agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting; 63 to 545 cases per 100,000 workers in
construction; 131 to 396 cases per 100,000 workers in administrative
and support and waste management and remediation services; 49.5 to 171
cases per 100,000 workers in transportation and warehousing; and 513
cases per 100,000 workers in utilities, among others. The working
lifetime incident rates were even higher in specific industries, such
as an estimated 3,479 cases of HRI per 100,000 workers for farm labor
contractors and crew leaders and 2,439 cases per 100,000 structural
steel and precast concrete workers over a working lifetime of 45 years
(see Section V. A., Risk Assessment, table V-1). OSHA preliminarily
concludes that these incidence rates, though as explained below
substantially underestimate actual risk, are the best available
evidence and sufficient to make a finding of significant risk of HRIs
among workers who are exposed to occupational heat.
While the data are not sufficient to develop a single point
estimate of the risk posed to heat-exposed workers, OSHA has
preliminarily determined that the available data from BLS and workers'
compensation claims support an estimate of working lifetime risk of HRI
ranging from 135 cases per 100,000 workers (calculated based on the BLS
average estimated annual incidence of HRIs for all workers for 2011-
2020) to 3,479 cases per 100,000 workers (based on workers'
compensation claims). Even the lowest estimate within this range
exceeds the 1/1000 threshold that OSHA has historically found to
clearly constitute a significant risk.
As noted above, OSHA believes that these data from BLS and workers'
compensation claims substantially understate the true risk to workers.
For one, the inclusion criteria for the surveillance systems used to
estimate incidence would exclude a large proportion of HRI cases. For
instance, prior to this year, the BLS SOII only reported the estimated
number of HRIs that involved days away from work, which may be less
than 50% of all OSHA-recordable work-related HRIs (see, e.g., BLS, IIF
Latest Numbers for 2022, https://www.bls.gov/iif/latest-numbers.htm).
Additionally, the majority of incidence estimates identified by OSHA
are based on the risk of HRIs confronting an entire working population
(e.g., all workers in a particular industry or sector), both exposed
and non-exposed. Clearly, the risk of experiencing a work-related HRI
is considerably higher among the subset of workers exposed to heat
hazards in their jobs than it is for the rest of the working
population. For example, the annual BLS incidence estimates are
susceptible to understating risk in this way because when BLS
calculates annual incidence estimates, it captures the entire U.S.
workforce in the denominator, which includes a large
[[Page 70768]]
number of unexposed workers (e.g., office workers in climate-controlled
buildings). Consequently, the working lifetime risk of HRI estimate
based on BLS's annual incidence estimates (i.e., 135 cases per 100,000
workers), also substantially underestimates the true risk for heat-
exposed workers. There is also a large body of literature demonstrating
the general underreporting of work-related injuries and illnesses, the
findings of which OSHA believes would also apply to HRIs. See Section
V.A., Risk Assessment, for additional discussion of underreporting of
heat-related fatalities and HRIs.
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, dozens of peer-
reviewed studies and multiple authoritative bodies (e.g., NIOSH, ACGIH,
ANSI/ASSP) indicate that the provisions outlined in this proposed rule
would, if promulgated, substantially reduce risk to workers. A large
body of data demonstrates that workplace interventions--such as rest
breaks, cool drinking water, acclimatization, shade, and fans--can be
very effective in reducing heat strain, which is responsible for
causing HRIs. This reduction in heat strain and/or reduction in HRI
risk has been shown in studies that have examined the impact of
interventions in an experimental setting, as well as studies that have
documented reductions in HRI prevalence following the implementation of
heat injury and illness prevention measures. OSHA preliminarily
concludes that implementation of the proposed standard will result in a
substantial reduction in HRIs (range of estimates: 37-96%) and heat-
related fatalities (range of estimates: 99.8-100%) in employees who
would be covered under the proposed standard.
C. Preliminary Conclusions
OSHA preliminarily concludes that HRIs associated with workplace
exposure to heat hazards constitute material harm. Further, based on
the evidence discussed in this section, the agency preliminarily
concludes that heat-exposed workers are at significant risk of
experiencing a work-related HRI or heat-related death, and compliance
with the proposed standard would substantially reduce that risk.
VII. Explanation of Proposed Requirements
A. Paragraph (a) Scope and Application
Paragraph (a) establishes the scope of the proposed standard.
Paragraph (a)(1) would require all employers subject to OSHA's
jurisdiction--including general industry, construction, maritime, and
agriculture--to comply with the proposed requirements, subject to the
exemptions in proposed paragraphs (a)(2) and (3). The scope of the
proposed standard applies to a wide range of sectors that include both
indoor and outdoor work areas. The proposed standard aims to provide
protections while accounting for the different work areas, anticipated
exposures, and other conditions in these sectors.
Paragraph (a)(2) describes the exemptions for the proposed standard
based on work activities. Employers would be responsible for
determining which work activities are covered by the standard. Although
an employer may have some work activities exempt from the proposed
standard, other activities may be covered (except for organizations
whose primary function is the performance of firefighting. See the
discussion of paragraph (a)(2)(iii) below). Under paragraph (a)(3), if
an employer's employees exclusively perform the work activities in
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (vi), then that employer would be exempt
from this proposed standard.
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) would exclude work activities for which there
is no reasonable expectation of exposure at or above the initial heat
trigger. This exception recognizes that some workplaces would not
reasonably be expected to reach or exceed the initial heat trigger
(e.g., because of their location and/or seasonal variations in
temperature). This exclusion may apply to work activities such as
operating seasonal businesses outdoors (e.g., during winter months),
when temperatures are lower than the initial heat trigger. For
instance, if a business that exclusively operates an outdoor holiday
market during the winter season in a location where daily high
temperatures are always below the initial heat trigger, this standard
would not apply to work activities performed at that market.
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) would exclude short duration employee
exposures at or above the initial heat trigger of 15 minutes or less in
any 60-minute period. OSHA has preliminarily concluded that
intermittent exposures within this duration are not likely to
significantly raise core body temperature and result in heat-related
injuries and illnesses (HRIs). Numerous studies (many described in
Section V.C., Risk Reduction) evaluated the effect of hotter
temperatures on participants' core body temperatures under various
scenarios (e.g., clothing type, level of activity, work/rest periods,
acclimatization status) of different durations. Overall, evidence
suggests that heat exposure of 15 minutes or less does not tend to
cause an elevation of at least 1 [deg]C (1.8 [deg]F) in participants'
core body temperatures, which would be indicative of potential heat
stress (McLellan & Selkirk, 2006; Meade et al., 2016b; Lamarche et al.,
2017; Seo et al., 2019; Kaltsatou et al., 2020; Notley et al., 2022a;
Notley et al., 2022b).
This exemption recognizes that while typical work activities may
take place below the initial heat trigger, employees may experience
short exposures to heat at various times during their shift. For
example, an employer who is otherwise exempt from the standard but has
employees who occasionally walk to collect mail outside in temperatures
at or above the initial heat trigger for 15 minutes or less in any 60-
minute period, would still be exempt. This exemption is consistent with
the scope exemptions of Colorado, Washington, and Oregon's State
standards (7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103-15:3 (2023); Wash. Admin.
Code 296-307-09710 (2023); Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156 (2024)).
In addition, in order for this exemption to apply for employees
whose work activities are primarily performed in air-conditioned
vehicles, employers must ensure employees are not exposed to
temperatures at or above the initial heat trigger for more than 15
minutes in any 60-minute period. For instance, where an employee who
drives an air-conditioned vehicle repeatedly exits the vehicle to
deliver product in temperatures at or above the initial heat trigger,
this activity would only be exempt from the standard if cumulative
exposure in any 60-minute period at or above the initial heat trigger
is for 15 minutes or less. If delivery tasks, such as unloading product
from the vehicle and moving product to its destination, occur at or
above the initial heat trigger for more than 15 minutes in any 60-
minute period, these work activities would be covered by the standard.
Paragraph (a)(2)(iii) would exclude organizations whose primary
function is the performance of firefighting. It would also exclude
emergency response activities of workplace emergency response teams,
emergency medical services (EMS), or technical search and rescue; \4\
and any emergency response
[[Page 70769]]
activities already covered under 29 CFR 1910.120, 1910.146, 1910.156,
part 1915, subpart P, 1926.65, and 1926.1211. Fire departments,
workplace emergency response teams, EMS, and technical search and
rescue are covered by OSHA's proposed Emergency Response standard (89
FR 7774, Feb. 5, 2024), which would replace the existing Fire Brigades
standard, 29 CFR 1910.156. The update to 29 CFR 1910.156 would expand
coverage from only fire brigades, industrial fire departments, and
private or contractual type fire departments, to include protections
for all employees who perform firefighting, EMS, or technical search
and rescue, as part of their regularly assigned duties as well as
employees who are members of a workplace emergency response team. If
the Emergency Response standard is finalized before this proposed
standard, OSHA intends to revise this exemption to reflect the updated
29 CFR 1910.156.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Technical search and rescue'' refers to a type of
emergency service that utilizes special knowledge and skills and
specialized equipment to resolve unique or complex search and rescue
situations, such as rope rescue, vehicle/machinery rescue,
structural collapse, trenches, and technical water rescue. OSHA
intends the phrase to have the same meaning as used in the proposed
Emergency Response standard (see 89 FR 7804).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The exemption would apply to all activities (including, e.g.,
training activities) at organizations whose primary function is the
performance of firefighting. In order to comply with the proposed
updates to 29 CFR 1910.156, firefighting organizations would have
programs in place that address heat-related hazards for their
employees.
For employers with employees who perform emergency response
activities as members of workplace emergency response teams (i.e.,
groups of employees who prepare for and respond to emergency incidents
at their workplace as a collateral duty to their regular daily work
assignments; see 89 FR at 7803), or who perform emergency medical
services or technical search and rescue, this exemption would only
apply when employees are performing emergency response activities. This
means during periods while these employees are performing other duties
unrelated to emergency response, employers would be required to comply
with the provisions of the standard, unless subject to another
exemption. For example, employees who are part of a manufacturing
plant's emergency response team would be exempt from the standard while
responding to an incident, such as a medical emergency, but would be
covered by the standard when performing their regular daily work
assignments. All other employees not engaged in emergency response
would also be covered by this proposed standard. Although OSHA is
proposing to exempt fire departments entirely, the agency is not
proposing to entirely exempt organizations that have employees who
perform EMS or technical search and rescue. This is because many
organizations who perform EMS (e.g., hospitals) or technical search and
rescue also conduct many other activities unrelated to emergency
response and OSHA intends these other activities to be covered by this
proposed standard unless another exemption applies.
The Emergency Response proposal includes several hazard assessment
and risk management requirements that would encompass heat hazards
faced by emergency responders (see 89 FR at 7813-7814). Further, in the
NPRM for Emergency Response, OSHA noted this rulemaking on heat illness
prevention and invited comment on whether the agency should include
specific requirements related to heat for some non-emergency activities
of emergency responders. At the same time, the agency recognized that
at times emergency responders must perform their duties regardless of
environmental conditions (89 FR at 7801). OSHA has preliminarily
concluded that it is appropriate to address any heat-related hazards
posed by emergency response activities in this separate rulemaking.
This proposed standard would also not apply to employees when they
are undertaking emergency response activities under 29 CFR 1910.120,
1910.146, 1910.156, subpart P, 1926.65, and 1926.1211. Many of these
standards provide employees protection from heat exposure during
emergency activities. In addition, OSHA believes that the emergency
nature of these activities warrant special consideration and the agency
is therefore exempting them from this proposed standard. However, this
proposed standard would otherwise apply to these employees during non-
emergency regular operations unless another exemption applies. For
example, with regard to the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response Standard (HAZWOPER) (29 CFR 1910.120 and 1926.65), which
covers employees who are exposed or potentially exposed to hazardous
substances and engaged in one of the operations as specified by 29 CFR
1910.120(a)(1)(i) through (v) and 1926.65(a)(1)(i) through (v), such as
clean-up operations, employees would only be exempt when responding to
emergency situations and would be covered by the standard when
participating in general hazardous waste operations.
Paragraph (a)(2)(iv) would exclude work activities performed in
indoor work areas or vehicles where air-conditioning consistently keeps
the ambient temperature below 80 [deg]F. OSHA specifies using ambient
temperature, as most heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC)
systems automatically report ambient temperature. Properly functioning
HVAC units also regulate indoor humidity levels, which would result in
similar measures of ambient temperature and heat index.
This exemption would only apply to indoor work areas and vehicles
that are consistently below an ambient temperature of 80 [deg]F. The
employer must ensure that the air-conditioning system consistently
maintains an ambient temperature below 80 [deg]F during work activities
for the exemption to apply. OSHA recognizes that there may be
unexpected malfunctions of air-conditioning systems that result in
periods of time without air-conditioning before a system is repaired.
In these situations, OSHA would expect that the employer takes steps to
expeditiously repair the air-conditioning system and return the
workplace to an ambient temperature below 80 [deg]F.
Paragraph (a)(2)(v) would exclude telework (i.e., work done from
home or another remote location of the employee's choosing). OSHA
generally does not hold employers liable for employees' home offices
and conditions of the telework environment (see CPL 02-00-125,
available at https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/cpl-02-00-125). However, only the work activities employees perform while
teleworking would be exempt and employers would be required to comply
with the standard when employees are on site if other exemptions do not
apply. For example, the standard would not cover work activities
conducted at an employee's home on Tuesdays and Thursdays in a given
week but would cover the employee's work activities at their employer's
office on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (unless another exemption
applies).
Paragraph (a)(2)(vi) would exclude sedentary work activities at
indoor work areas that only involve some combination of the following:
sitting, occasional standing and walking for brief periods of time, and
occasional lifting of objects weighing less than 10 pounds. The
exemption is intended to apply to work sites such as offices where
employees perform sedentary work activities for extended periods of
time (e.g., all or most of the workday). This exemption only applies to
indoor work activities, which are not generally subject to factors such
as solar radiation, which are common in outdoor exposures. OSHA
preliminarily concludes that employees engaged in
[[Page 70770]]
indoor sedentary work activities are at lower risk of heat-related
injury and illness, as production of metabolic heat is not
substantially elevated. Experimental studies of groups exposed to heat
(111.4 [deg]F (44 [deg]C), 30% relative humidity) while resting in a
seated position indicate core body temperature does not rise more than
1 [deg]C (1.8 [deg]F) over multiple hours (Kenny et al., 2017; Notley
et al., 2020). In addition to sitting, the exemption allows for indoor
work activities to include occasional standing and walking for brief
periods of time, and occasional lifting of objects weighing less than
10 pounds. When using the term ``occasional'' OSHA means up to one-
third of the workday (BLS, 2021), however these activities could only
be performed for brief periods of time over the course of the day for
the exemption to apply. For example, work activities performed at a
desk indoors, where the employee is seated and performing computer work
for the majority of their shift, but with occasional standing, as well
as walking short distances (e.g., to use the photocopier, to collect
office mail), would be exempt from the standard.
In addition, this exemption would apply to indoor operation of
vehicles while seated. For example, operation of a forklift inside of a
warehouse while seated would be considered an indoor sedentary work
activity and would be exempt. However, if a forklift operator's duties
involved loading and unloading heavy objects (greater than 10 pounds),
they would not be exempt from the standard. Other examples of
activities that would be exempt include indoor operation of reach
trucks, tow trucks, pallet trucks, golf carts, and other vehicles where
employees are seated.
This exemption would apply where employees are engaged in sedentary
work activities regardless of indoor temperature. While employees
performing these activities are likely at lower risk of experiencing
heat-related injury and illness, OSHA seeks comment as to whether the
sedentary work activities exemption should be limited to work
activities performed in indoor environments below a specified threshold
temperature (e.g., the high heat trigger) or whether this exemption
should account for certain workplace conditions. For example, should
this exemption cover an employer with employees who meet the criteria
in this proposed exemption, but whose work area is near a heat
generating process and impacted by radiant heat?
Paragraph (a)(3) specifies that employers whose employees all
exclusively perform activities described in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)
through (vi) are exempt from this standard. Employers may have
employees who would be exempt from the standard (e.g., employees
working indoors where air-conditioning consistently keeps the ambient
temperature below 80 [deg]F), as well as employees who would be covered
by the standard (e.g., employees harvesting produce outdoors). These
employers would be required to comply with the provisions of the
standard for the employees who perform work activities that are covered
by the standard. However, some employers may only have employees that
exclusively perform work activities that are exempt from the proposed
standard. For example, an employer with employees who all either
telework from home or other locations of their choosing or work inside
a building with air-conditioning that consistently keeps the ambient
temperature below 80 [deg]F would be exempt from the standard.
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether any of the proposed exclusions of emergency
response activities already covered under the standards listed in
proposed paragraph (a)(2)(iii) should be covered by this proposed
standard. If so, provide evidence and describe reason for why these
activities should not be excluded;
Where an employer relies on the exemption in proposed
paragraph (a)(2)(iv) to exclude work activities performed in indoor
work areas or vehicles where air-conditioning consistently keeps the
ambient temperature below 80 [deg]F, whether the standard should
address situations where the air-conditioning system does not function
properly and the ambient temperature reaches or exceeds 80 [deg]F; for
example, should certain requirements of the standard apply in this
scenario? Additionally, whether the standard should specify how long
the air-conditioning system can be out of order before the exemption no
longer applies;
Whether the description of sedentary work in the proposed
standard is appropriate, and if not, what revisions would be
appropriate;
Whether the standard should exempt all sedentary work
activities indoors or limit the exemption to only activities performed
below an upper limit (e.g., below the high heat trigger) at or above
which the exemption would no longer apply, and if so, what the upper
limit should be and what evidence exists demonstrating that even
sedentary work performed indoors can be a hazard to workers at or above
that limit; and
Whether the exemption for sedentary work activities should
be expanded to include work performed outdoors.
B. Paragraph (b) Definitions
Paragraph (b) defines several terms used in the proposed standard.
First, it defines Acclimatization to mean the body's adaptation to work
in the heat as a person is exposed to heat gradually over time, which
reduces the strain caused by heat stress and enables a person to work
with less chance of heat illness or injury.
Section V.C., Risk Reduction contains more information on
effectiveness of acclimatization. This definition is included because
paragraph (e)(7) of the proposed standard establishes requirements to
protect new and returning employees who are not acclimatized. Proposed
paragraph (e)(7) requires that employers implement one of two
acclimatization protocols for new and returning employees when the
initial heat trigger is met or exceeded. Under paragraph (j), employers
must implement acclimatization protocols at no cost to the employee. In
addition, proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iii) requires that employees be
trained that lack of acclimatization is a risk factor for HRI.
Ambient temperature means the temperature of the air surrounding a
body. Other terms for ambient temperature include ``air temperature''
or ``dry bulb temperature.'' Ambient temperature is measured by a
standard thermometer and often what people refer to when using the term
``temperature.'' Ambient temperature is defined because it is used in
the definitions for heat index and wet bulb globe temperature, in
addition to proposed paragraphs (a) Scope and application, (d)
Identifying heat hazards, (e) Requirements at or above the initial heat
trigger, and (f) Requirements at or above the high heat trigger.
Cooling personal protective equipment (PPE) means equipment that is
worn to protect the user against heat-related injury or illness. This
definition is included to clarify the requirement under proposed
paragraph (e)(1) that if the employer provides employees with cooling
PPE, the cooling properties must be maintained during use.
Cooling PPE is gear designed to help maintain a safe body
temperature for individuals working in hot environments or engaged in
physically demanding activities. Cooling PPE typically employs various
technologies to facilitate heat dissipation and
[[Page 70771]]
enhance comfort, such as water absorption crystals or phase change
materials (PCM) which draw heat away from the wearer. Cooling bandanas
and neck wraps are worn around the neck and can be soaked in cold
water. Additionally, other types of clothing may incorporate materials
that have cooling properties.
Heat index means the National Weather Service heat index, which
combines ambient temperature and humidity. It provides a number that
can be used to indicate how hot it feels. There are several tools for
measuring heat index in both indoor and outdoor work areas. For outdoor
work areas, the OSHA-NIOSH Heat Safety Tool app and other phone-based
weather apps can be used to show the heat index by location as well as
hourly forecasts. For indoor work areas, employers can enter
measurements of humidity and ambient temperature into the NOAA Heat
Index Calculator. There are also monitoring devices that report heat
index. Heat index is defined because the term is used in definitions of
high heat trigger and initial heat trigger. The term is also used in
proposed paragraphs (c) Heat injury and illness prevention plan, (d)
Identifying heat hazards, and (e) Requirements at or above the initial
heat trigger.
High heat trigger means a heat index of 90 [deg]F or a wet bulb
globe temperature (WBGT) equal to the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit.
See explanations for the definitions of wet bulb globe temperature
(WBGT) and Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) for more information about
those terms. OSHA is including a definition for high heat trigger
because exposures at or above the high heat trigger would require the
implementation of a number of controls, in addition to the controls
that would be implemented under the initial heat trigger in proposed
paragraph (e). The controls implemented under the initial heat trigger
are described below under the definition for Initial Heat Trigger. The
additional controls that would be implemented under the high heat
trigger under proposed paragraph (f) include required rest breaks,
observation for signs and symptoms, hazard alerts, and warning signs
for excessively high heat areas. See Section VII.F., Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for more information on these controls. The
scientific basis supporting the establishment of the high heat trigger
at a heat index of 90 [deg]F or a WBGT equal to the NIOSH REL is
explained in in Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High Heat Triggers.
Indoor/indoors means an area under a ceiling or overhead covering
that restricts airflow and has along its entire perimeter walls, doors,
windows, dividers, or other physical barriers that restrict airflow,
whether open or closed. Possible examples for indoors include work in a
garage, even if the garage door is open; the interior of a warehouse,
even if multiple doors are open on loading docks; and a shed with four
walls and a ceiling, even if the windows are open. Construction
activity is considered to be work in an indoor environment when
performed inside a structure after the outside walls and roof are
erected. This definition is included because the term is used in
definitions for outdoor/outdoors, and proposed paragraphs (a) Scope and
application, (d) Identifying heat hazards, (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, (f) Requirements at or above the high heat
trigger, and (i) Recordkeeping.
Initial heat trigger means a heat index of 80 [deg]F or a WBGT
equal to the NIOSH Recommended Alert Limit (RAL). See explanations for
the definitions of wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) and Recommended
Alert Limit (RAL) for more information about those terms. OSHA is
including a definition for initial heat trigger because exposures at or
above the initial heat trigger would require the implementation of a
number of controls under proposed paragraph (e), including requirements
for drinking water, break area(s) for indoor and outdoor work sites,
indoor work area controls, acclimatization of new and returning
employees, rest breaks if needed to prevent overheating, effective
communication, and maintenance of PPE cooling properties if PPE is
provided. See Section VII.E., Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
more information on these controls. The scientific basis supporting the
establishment of the initial heat trigger at a heat index of 80 [deg]F
or a wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) equal to the NIOSH RAL is
explained in detail in Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High Heat
Triggers.
Outdoor/outdoors means an area that is not indoors, as defined
above. The definition also specifies that vehicles operated outdoors
are considered outdoor work areas for purposes of this standard unless
exempted by paragraph (a)(2). Examples of outdoor work include tasks
performed in agricultural fields and under canopies and pavilions. This
term is defined because it is used in proposed paragraphs (d)
Identifying heat hazards, (e) Requirements at or above the initial heat
trigger, and (h) Training.
Radiant heat means heat transferred by electromagnetic waves
between surfaces. This definition further notes that sources of radiant
heat include the sun, hot objects, hot liquids, hot surfaces, and fire.
Radiant heat is transferred from a hotter object to a cooler
object. The transfer of radiant heat can occur across distances and
does not require objects to touch each other. Infrared radiation is a
common source of radiant heat that is encountered in foundries, and in
iron, steel, and glass industries (NIOSH, 2016). Sources of exposure to
radiant heat in the workplace can include furnaces, ovens, and
combustion. Radiant heat is defined because it is included in the
definition for wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) and is used in
paragraph (e) Requirements at or above the initial heat trigger.
Recommended Alert Limit (RAL) means the NIOSH-recommended heat
stress alert limits for unacclimatized workers. OSHA is proposing to
incorporate by reference NIOSH Publication No. 2016-106 Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments (NIOSH, 2016). OSHA is including a definition for RAL
because the initial heat trigger incorporates the NIOSH RAL. Thus,
several provisions of the standard are triggered by either a heat index
of 80 [deg]F or a wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) equal to the NIOSH
RAL. See Explanation of Proposed Requirements for Definitions (initial
heat trigger, wet bulb globe temperature) and proposed paragraph (e),
Requirements at or above the Initial heat trigger for more details.
NIOSH (2016) developed the RAL to protect most healthy non-
acclimatized employees from adverse effects of heat stress and
recommends that total heat exposure for non-acclimatized employees be
controlled to maintain combinations of environmental and metabolic heat
below the applicable RAL in order to maintain thermal equilibrium.
Environmental exposures are based on WBGT, which accounts for the
contributions of ambient temperature, radiant heat, humidity, and wind
speed. Metabolic heat production is estimated by workload. The RAL
assumes employees are wearing ``the conventional one-layer work
clothing ensemble,'' but NIOSH provides guidance for adjusting the WBGT
based on the types of clothing or PPE worn. The formula for calculating
the RAL is: RAL [ [deg]C-WBGT] = 59.9-14.1 log10M[W], where
M is metabolic rate in watts (W).
Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) means the NIOSH-recommended heat
[[Page 70772]]
stress exposure limits for acclimatized workers. OSHA is proposing to
incorporate by reference NIOSH Publication No. 2016-106 Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot
Environments (NIOSH, 2016). OSHA is including a definition for REL
because the high heat trigger incorporates the NIOSH REL. Thus, several
provisions of the standard are triggered by either a heat index of 90
[deg]F or a wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) equal to the NIOSH REL.
See Explanation of Proposed Requirements for Definitions (high heat
trigger, wet bulb globe temperature) and proposed paragraph (f),
Requirements at or above the high heat trigger for more details.
NIOSH (2016) developed the REL to protect most healthy acclimatized
employees from adverse effects of heat stress and recommends that total
heat exposure for acclimatized employees be controlled to maintain
combinations of environmental and metabolic heat below the applicable
REL in order to maintain thermal equilibrium. Environmental exposures
are based on WBGT, which accounts for the contributions of ambient
temperature, radiant heat, humidity, and wind speed. Metabolic heat
production is estimated by workload. The REL assume employees are
wearing ``the conventional one-layer work clothing ensemble,'' but
NIOSH provides guidance for adjusting WBGT based on the types of
clothing or PPE worn. The formula for calculating the REL is: REL [
[deg]C-WBGT]= 56.7-11.5 log10M[W], where M is metabolic rate
in watts (W).
Shade is defined as the blockage of direct sunlight, such that
objects do not cast a shadow in the area of blocked sunlight. This
definition is included to clarify the requirements for use of shade as
a control in outdoor break areas under proposed paragraph (e)(3)(i).
Shade can be artificial or naturally occurring. See Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph (e)(3).
Signs and symptoms of heat-related illness means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness and includes headache, nausea,
weakness, dizziness, elevated body temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms. This term is used throughout the proposal to
refer to a range of signs and symptoms that may result from a variety
of heat-related illnesses (see Section IV., Health Effects for a
detailed discussion of heat-related illnesses and the accompanying
symptoms). This term is defined to provide clarity about scenarios for
which an employer must develop procedures for responding to employees
experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related illness in their heat
emergency response plan, as well as the scenarios that an employer
would be required to take specific actions to aid affected employees
under proposed paragraph (g). This definition also provides clarity on
the requirements to train employees on signs and symptoms of heat-
related illness (see proposed paragraph (h)(iv)) and monitor employees
for signs and symptoms of heat-related illness (see proposed paragraph
(f)(3).
Signs and symptoms of a heat emergency means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness that require emergency
response and include loss of consciousness (i.e., fainting, collapse)
with excessive body temperature, which may or may not be accompanied by
vertigo, nausea, headache, cerebral dysfunction, or bizarre behavior.
This could also include staggering, vomiting, acting irrationally or
disoriented, having convulsions, and (even after resting) having an
elevated heart rate. This term is defined to provide clarity about
scenarios for which an employer must develop procedures to respond to
employees experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat emergency in their
heat emergency response plan, as well as the scenarios in which an
employer would be required to take specific actions to aid affected
employees under proposed paragraph (g). This definition also provides
clarity on the requirements to train employees on signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness and which ones require immediate emergency action
(see proposed paragraph (h)(iv)).
Vapor-impermeable clothing means full-body clothing that
significantly inhibits or completely prevents sweat produced by the
body from evaporating into the outside air. The definition further
indicates that examples include encapsulating suits, various forms of
chemical resistant suits, and other forms of non-breathable PPE. This
definition is included because under proposed paragraph (c)(3)
employers that have employees who wear vapor-impermeable clothing would
be required to evaluate heat stress hazards resulting from these
clothing and implement policies and procedures based on reputable
sources to protect employees while wearing this clothing. Vapor-
impermeable clothing is also referred to as ``vapor barrier'' clothing.
It is a type of protective clothing that employers may provide to
employees to protect them from chemical, physical, or biological
hazards for work tasks such as hazardous waste clean-up. Examples
include metallic reflective clothing or chemical resistant clothing
made from plastics such as vinyl or nylon-reinforced polyethylene
(Mihal, 1981). Materials made from 100% high density polyethylene
(e.g., Tyvek[supreg]) that allow water vapor and gases to pass through
are not vapor-impermeable, but lamination of the materials with some
substances such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) can change the
breathability of the materials and render them vapor-impermeable
(DuPont, 2024; Paull and Rosenthal, 1987). Because the proposed
definition indicates ``full-body clothing'', it would not include
vapor-impermeable PPE that covers small areas of the body (e.g.,
gloves, boots, aprons, leggings, gauntlets). However, clothing such as
boots and gloves made from vapor-impermeable materials such as rubber
may be part of whole-body, vapor-impermeable clothing ensembles (Mihal,
1981; Paull and Rosenthal, 1987). Employers could check product
information provided by manufacturers to determine if clothing worn by
their employees qualifies as vapor-impermeable clothing.
Vehicle means a car, truck, van, or other motorized means of
transporting people or goods. Other examples may include a forklift,
reach truck, tow truck, pallet truck, or bus, among others. In
addition, vehicles may also include equipment such as a bulldozer, road
grader, farm tractor, or crane. Under the proposed definitions, a
vehicle would be a work area when a worker's work activities occur in
the vehicle.
Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) is a heat metric that takes into
account ambient temperature, humidity, radiant heat from sunlight or
artificial heat sources, and air movement. It can be measured in both
indoor and outdoor work areas, however there are separate formulas
depending on whether the device is being used indoors or outdoors. WBGT
is used by NIOSH and ACGIH in their guidance for evaluating
occupational heat stress. The term is defined because it is used in the
definitions for the high and initial heat triggers and in proposed
paragraphs (c) Heat injury and illness prevention plan and (d)
Identifying heat hazards.
Work area means an area where one or more employees are working
within a work site. This includes any area where an employee performs
any work-related activity. A work area may be located at the employer's
premises or other locations where an employee may be engaged in work-
related activities or is present as a condition of their employment.
Work area is defined because it is referenced in several provisions of
the proposed standard, including (a) Scope and application, (c)
[[Page 70773]]
Heat injury and illness prevention plan (HIIPP), (d) Identifying heat
hazards, (e) Requirements at or above the initial heat trigger, (f)
Requirements at or above the high heat trigger, and (i) Recordkeeping.
Work site means a physical location (e.g., fixed, mobile) where the
employer's work or operations are performed. It includes outdoor and
indoor areas, individual structures or groups of structures, and all
areas where work or any work-related activity occurs (e.g., taking
breaks, going to the restroom, eating, entering or exiting work). The
work site includes the entirety of any space associated with the
employer's operations (e.g., workstations, hallways, stairwells,
breakrooms, bathrooms, elevators) and any other space that an employee
might occupy in arriving, working, or leaving. A work site may or may
not be under the employer's control. Work site is defined because it is
referenced in several provisions of the proposed standard including
Heat Injury and Prevention Plan (HIIPP) (proposed paragraph (c)),
Identifying heat hazards (proposed paragraph (d)), Requirements at or
above the initial heat trigger (proposed paragraph (e)), Requirements
at or above the high heat trigger (proposed paragraph (f)), Heat
illness and emergency response and planning (proposed paragraph (g)),
and Training (proposed paragraph (h)).
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments as to whether the proposed definitions are
appropriate, and whether any additional terms should be defined in the
standard.
C. Paragraph (c) Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Plan
Proposed paragraph (c) includes provisions for the development and
implementation of a work site heat injury and illness prevention plan,
referred to as a ``HIIPP'' or ``plan'' for the remainder of this
section, as well as requirements regarding what would need to be in the
plan. The development of a HIIPP, including comprehensive policies and
procedures, is necessary to ensure that all affected employees,
including exposed workers, supervisors, and heat safety coordinators,
understand where heat hazards exist at the workplace and the workplace-
specific measures that must be utilized to address those hazards. The
NIOSH Criteria Document provides information on the importance of a
HIIPP to reduce the risk of heat-related injuries and illness (NIOSH,
2016). Requiring a HIIPP is also consistent with regulations from
several of the States that have enacted or proposed heat-specific
standards. There is a plan requirement in existing heat standards from
California (Cal. Code of Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2005)), Washington
(Wash. Admin. Code sections 296-62-095 through 296-62-09560; 296-307-
097 through 296-307-09760 (2023)); and Oregon (Or. Admin. R. 437-002-
0156 (2022); Or. Admin. R. 437-004-1131 (2022)). Maryland and Nevada
proposed heat standards that would also require a HIIPP (MD, 2024; NV,
2022). Additionally, this requirement aligns with the recommendations
from the NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group, where
the group provided a list of potential elements to include in a HIIPP.
All the requirements in paragraph (c) would have to be included in the
employer's HIIPP.
Paragraph (c)(1) would require employers to develop and implement a
comprehensive HIIPP for each work site. Under proposed paragraph (b), a
work site is defined as a physical location (e.g., fixed, mobile) where
the employer's work or operations are performed. If an employer has
multiple work sites that are substantially similar, the HIIPP may be
developed by work site type rather than by individual work sites so
long as any site-specific information is included in the plan (e.g.,
phone numbers and addresses or site-specific heat sources). For
example, if an employer has developed a corporate HIIPP that includes
information about job tasks or exposure scenarios that apply at
multiple work sites, this information can be used in the development of
HIIPPs for individual work sites. When employees are in work areas not
controlled by the employer (like private residences), employers would
need procedures for how they will ensure compliance with the standard
(e.g., ensure that effective communication is being maintained
(proposed paragraph (f)(3)(iii)) and employees are receiving hazard
alerts to remind them of protections such as the importance of drinking
plenty of water, their right to take breaks, and locations of break
sites and drinking water (proposed paragraph (f)(4)). These employers
must include such policies and procedures in their HIIPP to protect
their employees entering those locations not controlled by the
employer.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) specifies the contents of the HIIPP.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2)(i) would require the HIIPP to include a
comprehensive list of the types of work activities covered by the plan.
For example, a landscaping company could indicate that all employees
conducting outdoor work at or above the initial heat trigger for at
least 15 minutes in any 60-minute period (e.g., lawn care workers,
gardeners, stonemasons, and general laborers) would be covered by the
HIIPP. (See proposed paragraphs (a)(2)(i), (ii), and (iv) and
Explanation for Proposed Requirements for Paragraph (a) Scope and
Application for more detail about coverage under the standard.)
Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) would require the inclusion of the policies and
procedures that are necessary to comply with the requirements of this
proposed standard. See Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraphs (d) through (j) for examples of how employers could comply
with the proposed provisions. OSHA understands that a HIIPP must be
adaptable to the physical characteristics of the work site and the job
tasks performed by employees, as well as the hazards identified by the
employer when designing their HIIPP. Employers could also include other
policies, procedures, or information necessary to comply with any
applicable Federal, State, or local laws, standards, and guidelines in
their HIIPPs. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii) would require that employers
identify the heat metric (i.e., heat index or wet bulb globe
temperature) that the employer will monitor to comply with paragraph
(d). For more information on heat metrics, see Explanation for Proposed
Requirements for Paragraph (b) Definitions for heat index and WBGT.
Paragraph (c)(3) would require that, in cases where employees wear
vapor-impermeable clothing (also called vapor barrier clothing),
employers must evaluate heat stress hazards resulting from this
clothing and implement policies and procedures based on reputable
sources to protect employees while wearing these clothing. The employer
must include these policies and procedures and document the evaluation
in the HIIPP. Under proposed paragraph (b), vapor-impermeable clothing
is defined as full-body clothing that significantly inhibits or
completely prevents sweat produced by the body from evaporating into
the outside air. The definition further indicates that examples include
encapsulating suits, various forms of chemical resistant suits, and
other forms of non-breathable PPE. For more information on vapor-
impermeable clothing, see the Explanation for Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (b) Definitions. This attention to vapor-impermeable clothing
is essential given that significant or complete inhibition of sweat
evaporation can greatly increase the potential for heat stress and
[[Page 70774]]
resulting heat strain and HRI (Mihal, 1981).
The requirement that employers evaluate heat stress and develop
policies and procedures to protect employees based on reputable sources
allows for flexibility, given that there is variability in duration of
use of the vapor-impermeable clothing and that workload also varies
across job tasks and occupations. Examples of reputable sources
employers can consult to assess heat stress and develop policies and
procedures to protect employees wearing vapor-impermeable clothing
include recommendations by NIOSH (2016) and ACGIH (2023). An example of
a policy employers might adopt to protect employees wearing vapor-
impermeable clothing is implementing the protections in the standard at
a lower temperature threshold. Such an approach has been used in State
standards such as the Washington heat standard for outdoor workplaces
(Wash. Admin. Code 296-307-09747 (2023)). In Washington State's heat
standard, employers must implement certain controls when employees are
wearing vapor barrier clothing, and the temperature is above 52 [deg]F.
Paragraph (c)(3) does not apply to vapor-permeable clothing or PPE such
as cotton coveralls, SMS polypropylene or polyolefin coveralls, double
layer woven clothing, or wool shirts (ACGIH, 2023; ACGIH, 2017; NIOSH,
2016).
Paragraph (c)(3) would require the employer to document in the
HIIPP the hazard evaluation performed to comply with this provision and
to include in the HIIPP the policies and procedures developed to
protect employee's wearing vapor-impermeable clothing. Although OSHA is
not specifying a particular form for the required hazard evaluation, an
effective hazard evaluation would include a review of environmental
heat exposures, a review of the high-risk area(s), tasks, and
occupations, and an evaluation of the length of time and intensity of
task when wearing vapor-impermeable clothing. Policies and procedures
should include communication of the status of planned or completed
actions to employees who may have to wear vapor-impermeable clothing to
complete work tasks. For more information on identifying heat hazards,
see Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (d) below.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(4), an employer with more than 10
employees would be required to develop and implement a written HIIPP.
While OSHA has concluded that a HIIPP is necessary for all employers
covered by the standard, OSHA has determined that only employers with
more than 10 employees need to have a written plan. This cutoff of 10
employees is consistent with OSHA's practice of allowing employers with
10 or fewer employees to communicate their emergency action plans (29
CFR 1910.38) and fire prevention plans (29 CFR 1910.39) orally to
employees. OSHA expects that small employers with 10 or fewer employees
are likely to have less complicated HIIPPs and will communicate with
employees verbally. The agency does not believe that there is a high
likelihood of misunderstanding when employers communicate their HIIPPs
to employees verbally. As a result, OSHA does not believe the added
burden on small employers of establishing a written plan is necessary.
However, small employers may opt to create a written HIIPP if they find
doing so is helpful in developing and implementing their plans.
In contrast, the agency is concerned that when employers have more
than 10 employees, there is likely sufficient complexity in the
employer's operation that putting the HIIPP in writing is necessary to
establish clear expectations and prevent miscommunication. For example,
employers with more than 10 employees may have employees working in
multiple locations or on multiple shifts, increasing the likelihood
that verbally communicating the employer's HIIPP will be ineffective.
Therefore, OSHA preliminarily finds that having a written HIIPP that
employees of larger employers can easily access is essential to ensure
those employees are informed about policies, programs, and protections
implemented by their employers to protect them from hazardous heat
exposure.
An employer may have already developed and implemented a HIIPP.
Existing plans may fulfill some of the requirements in this section. It
is not OSHA's intent for employers to duplicate current effective
HIIPPs, but each employer with a current HIIPP would have to evaluate
that plan for completeness to ensure it satisfies all the requirements
of this section. Employers with existing plans would be required to
modify and/or update their current HIIPP plans to incorporate any
missing required elements and provide training on these new updates or
modifications to all employees (see the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for Paragraph (h) Training). Employers with more than 10
employees would have to ensure their existing HIIPP is in writing.
Paragraph (c)(5) would require the employer to designate one or
more workplace heat safety coordinators to implement and monitor the
HIIPP. Any employee(s) capable of performing the role who receives the
training required by proposed paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) can be
designated heat safety coordinator(s). This employee(s) does not need
to be someone with specialized training. The heat safety coordinator(s)
could be a supervisor or an employee that the employer designates. The
heat safety coordinator(s) must have the authority to ensure compliance
with all aspects of the HIIPP. This requirement would ensure heat
safety coordinators can take prompt corrective measures when hazards
are identified. Proposed paragraph (c)(5) would also require that for
employers with more than 10 employees, the identity of the heat safety
coordinator(s) must be documented in the written HIIPP. Employers must
designate a heat safety coordinator(s) to implement and monitor the
HIIPP plan, but the exact responsibilities of a heat safety
coordinator(s) may vary based on the employer and work site. Some
possible duties of the heat safety coordinator(s) could include
conducting regular inspections of the work site to ensure the HIIPP is
being implemented appropriately and to monitor the ongoing
effectiveness of the plan. During such inspections, the heat safety
coordinator(s) could observe employees to ensure they are protecting
themselves by frequently drinking water or taking rest breaks that
employers would be required to provide.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(6), the employer would be required to
seek the input and involvement of non-managerial employees and their
representatives, if any, in the development and implementation of the
HIIPP. An employer could seek feedback from employees through a variety
of means, including safety meetings, a safety committee, conversations
between a supervisor and non-managerial employees, a process negotiated
with the exclusive bargaining agent (if any), or any other similarly
interactive process. The method of soliciting employee input is
flexible and may vary based on the employer and the work site. For
example, a large employer with many employees may find a safety
committee with representatives from various job categories combined
with anonymous suggestion boxes to be more effective than individual
conversations between supervisors and non-managerial employees. In the
case of a unionized workplace, a safety committee established through a
collective bargaining agreement may be the appropriate source for this
input,
[[Page 70775]]
based on the definition and scope of the committee's work. In contrast,
a small employer might determine that an ongoing interactive process
between the employer and employees (e.g., regular safety meetings) is a
more effective means of soliciting employee feedback. OSHA understands
employees often know the most about potential hazards associated with
their jobs. As such, employee participation is a key component of
effective safety and health programs.
Paragraph (c)(7) would require the employer to review and evaluate
the effectiveness of the HIIPP whenever a heat-related injury or
illness occurs that results in death, days away from work, medical
treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness, but at least
annually. Following each review, the employer would be required to
update the HIIPP as necessary. The employer would have to seek input
and involvement of non-managerial employees and their representatives,
if any, during any reviews and updates. OSHA preliminarily finds that a
heat-related illness or injury that results in death, days away from
work, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness
warrants an evaluation of the HIIPP because it could potentially
indicate a deficiency of the HIIPP. Additionally, the heat safety
coordinator might learn of a deficiency during an inspection or from
another employee. OSHA expects that employers would immediately address
any identified deficiencies and update the HIIPP accordingly. Under
proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iv), all employees would have to be retrained
following a heat-related injury or illness that results in death, days
away from work, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of
consciousness, and under proposed paragraph (h)(4)(ii) employees would
have to be retrained if identification of a deficiency results in an
update to the HIIPP. OSHA preliminarily finds that effective heat
injury and illness prevention plans would require periodic evaluation
to ensure they are implemented as intended and continue to achieve the
goal of preventing heat injury and illness and promoting workplace
safety and health. This re-evaluation can result in improvements in
controls to help reduce hazards.
Paragraph (c)(8) would require the employer to make the HIIPP
readily available at the work site to all employees performing work at
the work site. The HIIPP would have to be readily accessible during
each work shift to employees when they are in their work area(s). Paper
copies, electronic access (i.e., accessible via smart phone) and other
alternatives to maintaining paper copies of the HIIPP are permitted as
long as no barriers to immediate employee access in each work site are
created by such options.
Paragraph (c)(9) would require the employer to ensure the HIIPP is
available in a language each employee, supervisor, and heat safety
coordinator understands. Under proposed paragraph (c)(4), this would
require written translations of the plan in all languages that
employees, supervisors, and heat safety coordinators understand.
Employers could comply with this requirement by utilizing one of the
numerous translator programs available online if the employer has a way
to ensure accuracy of the translated materials. In cases where an
employee, supervisor, or heat safety coordinator can read and
comprehend English, but prefers to read in another language, the
employer would have no obligation to provide a written translation of
the plan in that individual's preferred language. If one or more
employees are not literate, the employer would have to ensure that
someone is available to read the written plan in a language that each
employee understands. Likewise, for employers who have less than 10
employees, the employer would have to ensure that someone is available
to explain the plan in a language that each employee, supervisor, and
heat safety coordinator understands. OSHA expects that an individual
who speaks employees' languages will be available in all workplaces
since effective communication between individuals such as employers,
supervisors, and employees would need to occur in order for employees
to understand the details about the work tasks they need to complete.
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
The approaches that stakeholders are taking to assess heat
stress and prevent HRI in employees wearing vapor-impermeable clothing;
Whether OSHA should specify a temperature that would
trigger all or certain requirements of the standard for employees
wearing vapor-impermeable clothing;
Additional approaches that OSHA should consider to protect
employees wearing vapor-impermeable clothing;
Whether the proposed requirement to seek input and
involvement from non-managerial employees and their representatives
under paragraph (c)(6) is adequate, or whether the explanation should
be expanded or otherwise amended (and if so, how and why);
Whether OSHA should define ``employee representative''
and, if so, whether the agency should specify that non-union employees
can designate a non-employee third-party (e.g., a safety and health
specialist, a worker advocacy group, or a community organization) to
provide expertise and input on their behalf;
Whether it is reasonable to require the HIIPP be made
available in a language that each employee, supervisor, and heat and
safety coordinator understands;
What methods and programs are available to provide
employees documents and information in multiple languages, whether
there are languages for which these resources are not available, and
how employers can provide adequate quality control to ensure that the
translations are done properly; and
Whether individuals are available at workplaces to provide
verbal translations of the plan for employees who are not literate or
do not speak English.
D. Paragraph (d) Identifying Heat Hazards
Proposed paragraph (d) sets forth requirements for assessing where
and when employees are exposed to heat at or above the initial and high
heat triggers. It would require employers with outdoor work sites to
monitor heat conditions at outdoor work areas by tracking local heat
index forecasts or measuring the heat metric of their choosing (heat
index or wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT)). It would require employers
with indoor work sites to identify work areas where there is a
reasonable expectation that employees are or may be exposed to heat at
or above the initial heat trigger and implement a plan for monitoring
these areas to determine when exposures above the initial and high heat
triggers occur, using the heat metric of their choosing (heat index or
WBGT). Determining when employees are exposed to heat at or above the
initial and high heat triggers is critical for ensuring that employees
are provided with appropriate protections (outlined in paragraphs (e)
and (f)).
Proposed paragraph (d)(1) would require employers whose employees
perform work outdoors to monitor the heat conditions at the work areas
where employees are working. Employers would have two options for
complying with this requirement--tracking local heat index forecasts
provided by National Weather Service (NWS) or other reputable sources
or making on-
[[Page 70776]]
site measurements using monitoring device(s).
Employers who choose to track local forecasts would need to consult
a reputable source for local heat index forecasts such as their local
NWS Weather Forecast Office, the OSHA-NIOSH Heat Safety Tool cell phone
application, or another weather forecast website or cell phone
application. When using these sources, employers would need to
accurately enter the location of the work area. The OSHA-NIOSH Heat
Safety Tool (and other cell phone applications) will automatically use
GPS to determine the user's location, so the forecast may be inaccurate
if using the tool at home and employers will need to manually enter the
work area location in these situations.
Employers who choose to conduct on-site monitoring would need to
set up monitoring devices at or as close as possible to the work area.
This could mean setting up the device(s) on a tripod a few yards away
from an employee. When there are multiple work areas at the same work
site, the employer could use a single monitoring device to measure heat
exposure for multiple work areas if there is no reasonable anticipation
that the heat exposure will differ between work areas. For example, if
employees are harvesting crops on different fields but are within a
mile of one another under similar work conditions, the employer could
use a single monitoring device. If there is reasonable anticipation
that employees at a work site have different levels of exposure,
employers could measure the exposure at the work area of the
employee(s) reasonably expected to have the highest exposure and apply
that value to all employees at the work site instead of measuring the
exposure for each work area.
Employers using heat index as their heat metric could either use
heat index monitors or measure temperature and humidity with separate
devices. In the latter situation, these employers would need to use a
heat index calculator, such as the one provided on the NWS website
(NWS, 2023), to calculate heat index from the separate temperature and
humidity readings. Employers using WBGT as their heat metric would need
to take into account differences in solar radiation and wind between
work areas when deciding whether a single measurement could be used for
multiple work areas. For example, measurements of WBGT in a work area
in the shade should not be applied to another work area that is not in
the shade. Regardless of which metric they choose to use, employers
conducting on-site monitoring should consult user manuals and ensure
devices are calibrated and in working order. Employers should follow
the device manufacturer's manual when conducting monitoring.
Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would require employers whose employees
perform work outdoors to consult the weather forecast or their
monitoring device(s)--whichever they are using to comply with paragraph
(d)(1)--frequently enough to determine with reasonable accuracy when
conditions at the work area reach the initial and high heat triggers.
Employers consulting forecasts would need to check the forecast as
close to the start of the work shift as possible to determine whether
and when the heat index at the work area may be at or above the initial
or high heat triggers. Depending on the forecast or conditions at the
work site, the employer then may or may not need to conduct further
monitoring during the day. If, for example, the employer consulted the
OSHA-NIOSH Heat Safety Tool before the work shift and it indicated that
the heat index would exceed the initial heat trigger but not the high
heat trigger during the last four hours of the work shift, the employer
would need to either: (1) implement control measures in accordance with
paragraph (e) for those four hours, or (2) consult the Heat Safety Tool
again later in the day and implement control measures in accordance
with paragraph (e) only for the hours during which real-time conditions
reported by the application exceed the initial heat trigger (which may
be more or less than four hours if the forecast earlier in the day
underestimated or overestimated the heat index). However, if the
employer consulted the OSHA-NIOSH Heat Safety Tool before the work
shift and it indicated that the heat index would be close to the
initial heat trigger but not exceed it, employers would need to check
the forecast again later in the day to determine whether the trigger
was exceeded. Employers would need to use short-term forecasts (i.e.,
hourly) rather than long-term forecasts (e.g., weekly, monthly) to
comply with proposed paragraphs (d)(1) and (2). Ultimately, the
employer is responsible for ensuring that the controls required at the
initial and high heat trigger are in place when those triggers are met,
and they should make decisions regarding the frequency of monitoring
with this in mind.
Likewise, employers who conduct on-site monitoring in order to
comply with paragraph (d)(1) will need to develop a reasonable
measurement strategy that is adapted to the expected conditions. If
forecasts provide no suggestion that the initial heat trigger could be
reached during the work shift, an employer may not need to take any
measurements. Where temperatures are expected to approach the initial
or high heat triggers, several measurements may be necessary,
particularly as the hottest part of the day approaches. For example, if
the employer measures at 10 a.m. and the heat index is very close but
below the initial heat trigger, the employer would likely need to
either check again sometime shortly thereafter or assume that the
trigger is exceeded. WBGT accounts for additional parameters--air speed
and radiant heat--so employers using WBGT may need to make additional
measurements when these conditions change at the work site.
Proposed paragraphs (d)(3)(i) and (ii) outline the requirements for
assessing heat hazards in indoor work sites, which differ slightly from
the requirements for outdoor work sites, in that employers would need
to identify the work areas where they reasonably expect employees to be
exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger and then create a
monitoring plan to determine when employees in those work areas are
exposed to heat at or above the initial and high heat triggers.
Employers could determine which work areas are expected to have
employee exposure at or above the initial heat trigger by consulting
various data sources, such as previously collected monitoring data,
site or process surveys, employee interviews and input, and heat injury
and illness surveillance data. Work areas near heat-generating
machinery are one example of where there may be a reasonable
expectation of employee exposure at or above the initial heat trigger.
In addition to heat-generating equipment, employers must determine
whether there is a reasonable expectation that an increase in the
outdoor temperature would increase temperatures in their indoor work
site, thereby exposing employees to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger.
Employers would be required to develop a monitoring plan that
covers each work area they identified in the prior step. The monitoring
plan is intended to determine when employees are exposed (e.g.,
specific times of day, during certain processes, certain months of the
year) to heat at or above the initial and high heat triggers for each
work area. When developing a monitoring plan(s), employers would need
to take into account the circumstances that could impact heat
conditions specific to each work area and work site. The monitoring
plan(s) would need to be included in the employer's HIIPP.
[[Page 70777]]
In complying with proposed paragraph (d)(3)(ii), employers would
need to outline in their monitoring plan how they will monitor either
heat index or WBGT using on-site monitors that are set up at or as
close as possible to the work area(s) identified under paragraph
(d)(3)(i). OSHA intends the phrase ``as close as possible'' to mean the
closest possible location that won't otherwise create inaccurate
measurements. The employer should ensure that their monitoring plan
outlines the appropriate frequency of measurements, which should be of
sufficient frequency to determine with reasonable accuracy employees'
exposure to heat. For example, if the employer determines there is only
a reasonable expectation that employees are or may be exposed to heat
at or above the initial heat trigger when a certain process is
happening or during certain times of the year, then they would only
need to monitor when that process is happening or during that time of
the year.
Employers using heat index as their heat metric could either use
heat index monitors or measure temperature and humidity with separate
devices. In the latter situation, these employers would need to use a
heat index calculator, such as the one provided on the NWS website
(NWS, 2023), to calculate heat index from the separate temperature and
humidity readings. Employers using WBGT as their heat metric would need
to take into account differences in radiant heat and air movement
between work areas when deciding whether a single measurement can be
used for multiple work areas. For example, measurements of WBGT in a
work area without a radiant heat source should not be applied to
another work area that is near a radiant heat source. Regardless of
which metric they choose to use, employers should consult user manuals
and ensure devices are calibrated and in working order. Employers
should follow the device manufacturer's manual when conducting
monitoring.
If there are multiple work areas where there is a reasonable
expectation that employees are or may be exposed to heat at or above
the initial heat trigger at a work site, the employer could conduct
representative sampling instead of taking measurements at each
individual work area. If using this approach, the employer would be
required to sample the work area(s) expected to be the hottest. For
example, this may involve monitoring the work area closest to a heat-
generating process. The employer cannot put a monitoring device in a
work area known or expected to be cooler and consider that
representative of other work areas.
If any changes occur that could increase employee exposure to heat
(i.e., a change in production, processes, equipment, controls, or a
substantial increase in outdoor temperature which has the potential to
increase heat exposure indoors), proposed paragraph (d)(3)(iii) would
require that the employer must evaluate any affected work area(s) to
identify where there is reasonable expectation that employees are or
may be exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger. Examples
of changes that could increase employee exposure to heat include the
installation of new equipment that generates heat in a work area that
didn't previously have heat-generating equipment or a local heat wave
that increases the heat index in a warehouse without air-conditioning.
The employer would be required to update their monitoring plan or
develop and implement a monitoring plan, in accordance with paragraph
(d)(3)(ii), to account for any increases in heat exposure.
Proposed paragraph (d)(3)(iv) would require employers to involve
non-managerial employees (and their representatives, if applicable) in
the determination of which work areas have a reasonable expectation of
exposing employees to heat at or above the initial heat trigger (which
is described in paragraph (d)(3)(i)). Employers would also be required
to involve non-managerial employees (and their representatives, if
applicable) in developing and updating the monitoring plan(s) outlined
in paragraph (d)(3)(ii) through (iii). One example of this involvement
would be employees providing input in identifying processes or
equipment that give off heat and times of the day or year when certain
areas of the building feel uncomfortably hot and warrant monitoring.
Employees are often the most knowledgeable about the conditions in
which they work and their involvement will help ensure the accuracy and
sufficiency of the employer's monitoring plan(s).
Proposed paragraph (d)(4) specifies that the heat metric (i.e.,
heat index or WBGT) that the employer chooses to monitor determines the
applicable initial and high heat triggers under the standard.
Specifically, as defined in paragraph (b), if the employer chooses to
monitor heat index, they would be required to use the initial heat
trigger of 80 [deg]F (heat index) and the high heat trigger of 90
[deg]F (heat index). If the employer chooses to use WBGT, they would be
required to use the NIOSH Recommended Alert Limit (RAL) as the initial
heat trigger and the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) as the high
heat trigger. As outlined in paragraph (c), the employer would be
required to identify which heat metric they are monitoring in their
HIIPP. If they do not do this, proposed paragraph (d)(4) specifies that
the initial and high heat trigger will be based on the heat index.
Proposed paragraph (d)(5) would provide an exemption from
monitoring requirements for employers who choose to assume that their
employees are exposed to heat at or above both the initial and high
heat triggers. In these cases, employers would not need to conduct
monitoring, but they would be required to provide all controls outlined
in paragraphs (e) and (f) while making this assumption. For the period
of time that employers choose to make this assumption and are therefore
exempt from monitoring requirements, they would not be required to keep
records of monitoring data (see paragraph (i), Recordkeeping).
I. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether the proposed requirement to monitor outdoor work
areas with ``sufficient frequency to determine with reasonable accuracy
employees' exposure to heat'' is adequate or whether the standard
should specify an interval of monitoring (and if so, what frequency and
why);
Whether OSHA should specify an interval of monitoring for
indoor work areas (and if so, what frequency and why);
Whether the standard should include a specific increase in
outdoor temperature that would trigger the requirements in paragraph
(d)(3)(iii) for indoor work areas, rather than the trigger being a
``substantial increase'', and if so, what magnitude of increase;
Whether there could be situations in which a lack of
cellular service prevents an employer from using weather forecasts or
real-time predictions, and if so, what alternatives would be
appropriate;
Whether the standard should require specifications related
to monitoring devices (e.g., in accordance with user manuals, properly
calibrated) and whether the standard should specify a permissible
accuracy level for monitoring devices; and
Whether the standard should further specify which sources
of forecast data employers can use to comply with paragraph (d)(1)(i)
and if so, what criteria should be used.
[[Page 70778]]
E. Paragraph (e) Requirements at or Above the Initial Heat Trigger
I. Timing
Paragraph (e) of the proposed standard would establish requirements
when employees are exposed to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger. As discussed in Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High Heat
Triggers, OSHA has preliminarily determined that the experimental and
observational evidence support that heat index triggers of 80 [deg]F
and 90 [deg]F are highly sensitive and therefore highly protective of
employees. Exposures at or above the initial heat trigger, a heat index
of 80 [deg]F or a corresponding wet bulb globe temperature equal to the
NIOSH Recommended Alert Limit, would require the employer to provide
the protections outlined in paragraphs (e)(2) through (10).
The employer would only be required to provide the specified
protections during the time period when employees are exposed to heat
at or above the initial heat trigger. In many cases, employees may only
be exposed at or above the initial heat trigger for part of their work
shift. For example, employees who work outdoors may begin work at 9
a.m. and finish work at 5 p.m. If their exposure is below the initial
heat trigger from 9 a.m. until 12 p.m., and at or above the initial
heat trigger from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m., the employer would only be
required to provide the protections specified in this paragraph from 12
p.m. to 5 p.m. Additional protective measures, outlined in paragraph
(f) Requirements at or above the high heat trigger, would be required
when employees are exposed to heat at or above the high heat trigger.
II. Drinking Water
Paragraph (e)(2) of the proposed standard would establish
requirements for drinking water when employees are exposed to heat at
or above the initial trigger. The proposed requirements of paragraph
(e)(2) are in addition to the requirements in existing OSHA sanitation
standards applicable to the employer, including the general industry
sanitation standard (29 CFR 1910.141); construction industry sanitation
standard (29 CFR 1926.51); field sanitation standard (29 CFR 1928.110);
shipyard employment sanitation standard (29 CFR 1915.88); marine
terminals sanitation standard (29 CFR 1917.127); and temporary labor
camp standard (29 CFR 1910.142). In addition to requirements for
drinking water, these standards require access to toilet facilities,
which is important to ensure that employees are not discouraged from
drinking adequate amounts of drinking water. As discussed in Risk
Reduction, Section V.C., drinking water has been shown to be an
effective intervention for preventing dehydration, heat strain, and
HRI. It allows employees to replace fluids lost by sweat and is
necessary to maintain blood volume for cardiovascular function and
thermoregulation.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(i) would require that employers provide
access to potable water that is placed in locations readily accessible
to employees. To ensure employees have sufficient drinking water
whenever needed, the drinking water should be located as close as
possible to employees, to facilitate rapid access. Employers could
comply with this provision by providing water coolers or food grade
jugs on vehicles if drinking water fountains or taps are not nearby, or
by providing bottled water or refillable water bottles so that
employees always have access to water. Employers supplying water
through a common source such as a tap or jug would have to provide a
means for employees to drink the water. This could include providing
disposable cups or single-user refillable water bottles. Under OSHA's
sanitation standards, common drinking cups or other shared utensils are
prohibited. Open containers such as barrels, pails, or tanks for
drinking water from which water must be dipped or poured, whether or
not they are fitted with a cover, are also prohibited under these
standards. In cases where employers provide single-user, refillable
water bottles, they should keep extra bottles or disposable cups on
hand in case employees misplace or forget to bring the bottle the
employer provided them.
OSHA notes that water would not be readily accessible if it is in a
location inaccessible to employees (e.g., the drinking water fountain
is inside a locked building or trailer). Water would also not be
readily accessible if it is placed at a distant or inconvenient
location in relation to where employees work. OSHA expects that
employers will have incentive to place the drinking water as close to
employees as feasible to minimize the amount of time needed to access
water, which must be paid. Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (j) Requirements implemented at no cost to employees).
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(ii) would require that employers provide
access to potable water that is suitably cool. As discussed in Risk
Reduction, Section V.C., the temperature of drinking water impacts
hydration levels, as cool or cold water has been found to be more
palatable than warm water, thus leading to higher consumption of cool
water and decreased risk of dehydration. Additional evidence
highlighted in Risk Reduction, Section V.C., shows that cool fluid
ingestion has beneficial effects for reducing heat strain. The
requirement that drinking water be ``suitably cool'' is consistent with
OSHA's existing field sanitation standard (29 CFR 1928.110(c)(1)(ii))
and with California's heat standard for outdoor workplaces (Cal. Code
Regs. tit. 8, section 3395). OSHA has previously stated that to be
suitably cool, the temperature of the water ``must be low enough to
encourage employees to drink it and to cool the core body temperature''
(Field Sanitation, 52 FR 16050, 16087 (May 1, 1987)). Employers could
comply with this provision by providing drinking water from a tap or
fountain that maintains a cooler temperature, providing water in
coolers or by providing ice or ice packs to keep drinks cool.
In addition to providing palatable and potable water, the NACOSH
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group recommended that
employers consider providing electrolyte supplemental packets that can
be added to water or electrolyte-containing sports drinks (NACOSH
Working Group on Heat, 2023). While employers could choose to offer
electrolyte supplements or electrolyte-containing sports drinks, they
would not be required under the standard. Providing electrolyte
supplements or sports drinks alone would not meet the proposed
requirement. OSHA has preliminarily determined that electrolyte
supplementation may not be necessary in a majority of situations if
workers are consuming adequate and regular meals (NIOSH, 2017a). OSHA
has also received feedback from stakeholders that some workers may be
unable to consume certain electrolyte supplements or solutions due to
their sugar content.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(iii) would require that employers provide
access to one quart of drinking water per employee per hour. Employers
could comply with this provision by providing access to a drinking
water tap or fountain that has a continuous supply of drinking water,
or providing coolers or jugs that are replenished with water as the
quantity diminishes. As discussed in more detail in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, that volume of water intake ensures adequate replenishment
of fluids lost through sweat to avoid a substantial loss in total body
water content for employees working in the
[[Page 70779]]
heat. OSHA is specifying the amount of water that employers need to
provide to employees, not an amount that employees need to drink.
However, as discussed in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraphs (f)(3) and (h), the employer must inform employees of the
importance of drinking water to prevent HRIs during initial training,
annual refresher training, and whenever the high heat trigger is met.
Finally, in accordance with paragraph (j) of the proposed standard,
all drinking water requirements must be implemented at no cost to
employees. Accordingly, employers may not charge employees for the
drinking water required by paragraph (e)(2) nor for the equipment or
supplies needed to access it.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and information on the following:
Whether OSHA should require a specific temperature or
ranges of temperature for drinking water as some State regulations do
(e.g., Colorado requires that drinking water is kept 60 [deg]F or
cooler);
Whether the agency should require the provision of
electrolyte supplements/solutions in addition to water;
Whether the requirement to provide a minimum of 1 quart
per hour per employee is appropriate; and
Whether there are any challenges to providing the required
amount of drinking water (e.g., for employees who work on foot in
remote areas) and, if so, alternatives that OSHA should consider.
III. Break Area(s) at Outdoor Work Sites
Paragraph (e)(3) contains the proposed requirements for outdoor
break areas when temperatures meet or exceed the initial heat trigger.
Adequate break areas where employees can hydrate, remove PPE, and cool
down is considered a vital component in preventing HRIs and necessary
part of a multilayered strategy to control exposure to high heat. The
requirements for both outdoor and indoor break areas in this proposed
standard are in addition to employers' obligations under OSHA's
sanitation standards (29 CFR 1910.141, 1915.88, 1917.127, 1918.95,
1926.51, 1928.110). Because the sanitation standards address workplace
hazards other than heat exposure, employers must continue to comply
with their obligations under those standards. OSHA highlights these
sanitations standards because employees are likely to eat and drink
water in the indoor break areas, which may implicate certain provisions
of these standards.
Specifically, proposed paragraph (e)(3) requires employers to
provide one or more employee break areas at outdoor work sites that can
accommodate the number of employees on break, is readily accessible to
the work area(s) and has either shade (paragraph (e)(3)(i)), or air-
conditioning if in an enclosed space (paragraph (e)(3)(ii))). As
explained more in detail in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, shade reduces
exposure to radiant heat which can contribute to heat stress and lead
to heat strain and HRI. Further, air-conditioning is effective in
reducing heat stress and resulting heat strain because it reduces
exposure to heat. Accordingly, OSHA has preliminarily determined that
requirements for break areas, including the use of controls to
facilitate cooling while employees are on break, are effective at
preventing HRIs among workers and should be included in the proposed
standard. This determination is supported by NIOSH's criteria for a
recommended standard, several State standards, and existing guidance
(Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2024); 7 Colo. Code Regs.
section 1103-15:3 (2023); Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156 (2024); Or. Admin.
R. 437-004-1131 (2024); Wash. Admin. Code 296-307-09747 (2023); NIOSH,
2016).
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) would require the employer to ensure the
break area(s) can accommodate all employees on break. This provision is
intended to ensure that all employees taking rest breaks that employers
would need to provide under proposed paragraphs (e)(8) and (f)(2) are
able to do so in an appropriate break area(s). If the break area cannot
accommodate the number of employees on break, some employees may not
have access to adequate cooling controls while on break, increasing
their risk of HRIs. In addition, adequate space allows for ventilation
and airflow, contributing to a more effective cooling.
While OSHA is not proposing a minimum square footage requirement
per employee, break areas that can only fit the anticipated number of
employees on break if employees stand shoulder to shoulder, or in such
close proximity that heat cannot dissipate, would not be large enough
to accommodate the number of employees on break. Break areas that are
not large enough to allow employees to move in and out freely or access
necessary amenities, such as water and air-conditioning or shade, would
also not be considered large enough to accommodate the number of
employees on break.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) does not require that the break area(s)
be able to accommodate an employer's entire workforce at the same time.
However, the employer must evaluate the needs of the work site and
ensure the break area(s) is large enough to accommodate all employees
reasonably expected to be on break at the same time. When making this
determination, employers would need to consider factors such as how
many employees are reasonably expected to be taking breaks to prevent
overheating under proposed paragraph (e)(8) at any given time, as well
as the breaks required under proposed paragraph (f)(2) (e.g., are
paragraph (f)(2) breaks staggered or will large groups of employees be
taking them at the same time?). However, the minimum frequency and
duration of breaks under paragraph (f)(2) must be met.
Similarly, where an employer has multiple break areas on-site, OSHA
does not expect each of these multiple break areas to be able to
accommodate an employer's entire workforce. Instead, OSHA expects that
employers who utilize multiple break areas will determine the number of
employees anticipated to access each break area and ensure the break
areas are sufficient in size to accommodate the need for break space in
each location. When making this determination, employers would need to
consider factors such as the distribution of employees across different
areas and any employee movement throughout the areas during a work
shift.
OSHA also acknowledges that some employers may have facilities
where both outdoor and indoor work occurs. OSHA requests comments on
whether the agency should permit all employees in these facilities to
utilize indoor break areas.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) would require that break areas be readily
accessible to the work area(s). It is important that break areas be
readily accessible to ensure that employees can take breaks promptly,
particularly in situations where employees are experiencing early
symptoms of HRIs, as quick access to a break area can help limit the
further progression of illness. In addition, break areas within close
proximity to employees encourages use. OSHA does not expect the
employer to have break areas located immediately adjacent to every
employee and understands that exact distance may vary depending on
factors such as the size and layout of the workplace, the number of
employees, and the nature of the work being performed.
Locations that are so far from work area(s) that they deter
employees from taking breaks would not be considered readily
accessible. When determining
[[Page 70780]]
the location of the break area(s), the employer would be expected to
evaluate the duration of travel to the area. Break areas requiring more
than a few minutes to reach would increase the heat stress on employees
as they walk to the area and thus not be considered reasonably
accessible. The break area must be situated close enough to work areas
to minimize the time and effort required for employees to access it.
Break areas should be as close as possible to employees so that an
employee in distress could easily access the area to promptly cool
down. OSHA expects that employers will have incentive to place the
break areas as close as practical to the work areas to minimize travel
time, which must be paid (see Explanation of Proposed Requirement for
paragraph (j) Requirements implemented at no cost to employees).
For mobile work sites, such as in road construction or utility
work, the employer would be expected to relocate the break area as
needed to ensure it is readily accessible to employees or ensure each
work site has its own break area for use. This requirement would also
apply to large work sites where employees are continually changing
their work area, such as in agricultural work. The employer would be
required to pay employees their normal rate of pay for time to get to
the break area, as well as the time on break (see the Explanation of
the Proposed Requirements for paragraph (j)).
In addition to ensuring the break area(s) is large enough to
accommodate all employees on break and readily accessible to the work
area(s), employers would have to provide at least one of the following:
shade (paragraph (e)(3)(i)); or air-conditioning, if in an enclosed
space (paragraph (e)(3)(ii)). As discussed above, break areas are
intended to provide employees a spot to cool down and reduce body
temperature. Also, controls such as shade and air-conditioning are
proven methods to prevent HRIs. Without controls such as these in
place, break areas could become uncomfortable and even continue to
expose individuals to the risk of HRI. OSHA understands that the scope
of the standard includes a broad variety of outdoor industries, and
that even within one industry, workplaces can be vastly different. The
proposed requirements for outdoor break areas give employers
flexibility in their compliance.
Paragraph (e)(3)(i) of the proposal outlines the requirements for
employers who use shade. The provision would require that the break
area have artificial shade (e.g., tent, pavilion) or natural shade
(e.g., trees), but not shade from equipment, that provides blockage of
direct sunlight and is open to the outside air. By incorporating shade
into break areas, whether through natural foliage, awnings, or
umbrellas, employees are able to reduce exposure to radiant heat and
benefit from conditions that are more conducive to increasing
evaporative cooling as air moves across the skin. The benefits of
shaded break areas have also been recognized by several States and
incorporated into State standards, including California, Colorado,
Oregon, and Washington (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395 (2024); 7
Colo. Code Regs. section 1103-15:3 (2023); Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156
(2024); Or. Admin. R. 437-004-1131 (2024); Wash. Admin. Code 296-307-
09747 (2023)).
To ensure shade is effective, OSHA would require the shade to block
direct sunlight for the break area. OSHA does not expect employers to
measure shade density using shade meters or solarimeters. As defined
under proposed paragraph (b) Shade means the blockage of direct
sunlight, such that objects do not cast a shadow in the area of blocked
sunlight. Therefore, verifying that employees' shadows are obstructed
from being visible due to the presence of shade would be sufficient. In
addition, shaded break area(s) must be open to the outside air. To
satisfy this requirement, the shaded break area must be sufficiently
open to the outside air to ensure that air movement across the skin
(promoting the evaporation of sweat) can occur and to prevent the
buildup of humidity and heat that can become trapped due to limited
airflow and stagnant air. For example, a pop-up canopy with one
enclosed side would comply with the provisions for a shade structure;
however, a closed trailer having four sides and a roof would not.
Employers could also incorporate other cooling measures, such as fans
or misting devices, in their shaded break area, although the proposed
standard does not require them to do so.
Both portable and fixed shade would be permitted to comply with the
proposed requirements under (e)(3)(i). However, as stated above,
employers must ensure shaded break areas remain readily accessible to
employees. At mobile work sites or work sites where employee move to
various locations throughout the day, such as, but not limited to those
commonly found in agriculture, landscaping, forestry, and utility work,
employers would need to ensure that shade structures are relocated near
the work area as needed or that natural sources of shade (e.g., from
trees) are readily available at each work location. OSHA understands
that in some mobile outdoor work environments shade structures may not
be practical and employers may wish to utilize the flexibility of shade
provided by large vehicles that are already on-site. Large vehicles
such as trucks and vans which are used to transport employees or goods
to the work site, but not as part of the work itself could be used as
shade as long as the vehicle is not running. OSHA is not allowing the
use of equipment used in work process, such as tractors, for shade due
to the risk of accidental run-overs caused by the start-up and movement
from operators who are not aware of the presence of workers nearby.
Additionally, equipment used in work processes is likely to emit
radiant heat after use, which may impede employee cooling. However,
shade provided by buildings could be used, provided it is reasonably
accessible to employee work areas. Additionally, as previously
explained, the break area(s) must be large enough to accommodate all
employees on break. Therefore, employers utilizing shade cast by
buildings or trees would need to consider the path of shade movement
throughout the day to ensure adequate areas of shade coverage are
maintained and the shade is able to accommodate all employees on break.
Paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of the proposal describes the requirements for
the use of air-conditioned break areas. Specifically, the proposed
provision indicates that a break area could be an area that has air-
conditioning if that area is in an enclosed space like a trailer,
vehicle, or structure. As with the shaded areas, the air-conditioned
break area would need to be large enough to accommodate the number of
employees on rest breaks and be readily available. The use of air-
conditioned spaces is consistent with State requirements and existing
guidance. In their State regulations, both Colorado and Washington
include the use of an air-conditioned site, such as a vehicle or
structure, as an alternative to providing shade for employee rest
breaks (7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103-15:3 (2023); WA, 2008b; Wash.
Admin. Code 296-307-09747 (2023). It is well established that the use
of air-conditioned spaces reduces the air temperature employees are
exposed to (NIOSH, 2016).
Employers using air-conditioned vehicles as a break area would need
to ensure that the vehicle remains readily available during work
periods when the initial heat trigger is met or exceeded. For mobile
employees, such as delivery drivers, employers could have employees
take breaks in an air-conditioned convenience store,
[[Page 70781]]
restaurant, or similar establishment as long as all other requirements
for break areas are met.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional information whether it should
further specify break area requirements (e.g., square footage per
employee), and what those requirements should be. Also, OSHA seeks
additional comments on break areas where employers have both indoor and
outdoor work areas including:
Whether OSHA should maintain separate break area
requirements for these employees;
Whether OSHA should allow outdoor employees in these
facilities to utilize indoor break areas under paragraph (e)(4); and
Whether OSHA should limit the use of indoor break areas to
those that are equipped with air-conditioning.
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
shade, including:
Whether OSHA appropriately defined shade; if not, how
should OSHA define shade for outdoor break areas;
Whether there are situations where shade is not protective
and should not be permitted; and in these cases, what should be
required for break areas;
Whether there are additional options for shade that are
protective, but which OSHA has not included;
Whether there are situations when trees are not
appropriate for use as shade and other measures should be required;
Whether there are situations when employers should be
permitted to use equipment as shade; in those situations, how would
employers mitigate other safety concerns such as run-over incidents;
Whether there are situations when employers should not be
able to use large vehicles as shade or concerns, including those
related to safety, with generally allowing the use of large vehicles
for shade; and
Whether there are situations when artificial shade should
not be permitted, such as during high winds.
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
air-conditioned spaces, including:
Whether OSHA should define or specify the levels at which
air-conditioning must operate; and
Whether OSHA should require that break rooms and vehicles
used for breaks be pre-cooled prior to the start of the employee's
break.
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
other cooling strategies (beside shade and air-conditioning) that could
be used in break areas, including:
Whether there are other control options that would be both
as effective as shade at reducing heat strain and feasible to
implement;
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding break area
requirements for mobile workers:
OSHA did not include separate requirements and seeks
additional information on the feasibility and effectiveness of the
proposed controls listed under paragraph (e)(3) including the use of
vehicles as a break area; and
Whether there are control options OSHA should require for
vehicles, either when used for work activities or when used as a break
area.
IV. Break Area(s) at Indoor Work Sites
Paragraph (e)(4) of the proposed standard outlines the requirements
for break areas at indoor work sites. Specifically, it would require
that the employer provide one or more area(s) for employees to take
breaks (e.g., break room) that is air-conditioned or has increased air
movement and, if appropriate, de-humidification; can accommodate the
number of employees on break; and is readily accessible to the work
area(s). As explained above in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (e)(3), the requirements for both outdoor and indoor
break areas in this proposed standard are in addition to employers'
obligations under OSHA's sanitation standards (29 CFR 1910.141,
1915.88, 1917.127, 1918.95, 1926.51, 1928.110).
Information regarding compliance with the requirements that break
area(s) be large enough to accommodate all employees on break and
readily accessible can be found in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(3). Break area(s) at indoor work sites
will often likely be specific rooms in a facility (e.g., a break room).
To ensure that the break areas are readily accessible, employers would
need to make sure that employees can enter the break areas for heat-
related breaks (e.g., keep the break room unlocked).
At indoor work sites, the break area(s) must be air-conditioned or
have a combination of increased air movement and, if appropriate, de-
humidification. The importance and effectiveness of air-conditioning
and air movement in preventing HRIs were explained above in the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (e)(3). OSHA is
requiring de-humidification, if appropriate, in addition to increased
air movement because humidity levels directly impact the body's ability
to cool itself through evaporation. Humidity control is integrated into
modern air-conditioning units and therefore OSHA is only requiring de-
humidification to be implemented in high temperature and high humidity
environments when employers are relying on increased air movement to
comply with this requirement. To determine when de-humidification may
be appropriate in the context of fan use, employers should consult the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (e)(6).
To comply with the requirements under proposed paragraph (e)(4),
employers who operate in arid environments could use evaporative or
``swamp'' coolers as a form of air-conditioning. Note, however, that
such coolers are not effective in humid environments. It is also
important to note that OSHA is not requiring employers install a
permanent cooling system. The use of portable air-conditioning units or
high-powered fans and portable dehumidifiers in designated break areas
could also be used to comply with requirements for break areas under
the proposed standard. As discussed in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (e)(6), fan use when ambient temperatures
exceed 102 [deg]F has been demonstrated to be harmful under some
conditions and employers must evaluate humidity levels to determine if
fan use should be avoided.
Under the proposal, indoor break area(s) do not necessarily need to
be located in a separate room but can be integrated within the main
workspace. For example, in a manufacturing facility, there could be a
designated corner or section within the main production area where
employees could take their breaks. This break area could be demarcated
by partitions, screens, or signage to distinguish it from the active
work zones and be equipped with fans. Alternatively, an employer, who
is unable to establish a break area in their main workroom because of
sensitive or hazardous work equipment or processes, can establish a
break area in a separate area away from the work zone, provided that
area is readily accessible to employees. Regardless of where a break
area is located, the break area must allow employees to cool down
effectively and drink water to hydrate.
For indoor workplaces that experience temperatures above the heat
triggers but have employees who spend part of their time in air-
conditioned control booths or control rooms and part of their time in
other, hotter areas of the facility, the employer could utilize the
control booth/room as a break area and
[[Page 70782]]
would not need to provide a separate break area for those employees.
Control booths/rooms are commonly found in industries such as
manufacturing, food processing, electronics assembly, processing
facilities, power plants, water treatment plants, and more.
Furthermore, these spaces would qualify as break areas for other
employees provided that the requirements for size and location are met.
Control booths/rooms that are locked or have restricted accessibility
would not be acceptable under the proposal.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
engineering controls for indoor break areas, including:
Whether OSHA should specify how effective engineering
controls need to be in cooling the break area(s), including other
measures determining effectiveness beyond temperature and humidity;
Whether OSHA should define a temperature differential
between work areas and break areas; and
Whether OSHA should specify a temperature that break areas
must be kept below.
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
other cooling strategies (besides fans and air-conditioning) that could
be used in break areas, including:
Whether there are other control options that would be both
effective at reducing heat strain and feasible to implement.
OSHA did not include an option for the use of outdoor break areas
for indoor work sites and seeks comment and information on the use of
outdoor break areas for employees in indoor work sites, including:
Whether there are situations where an outdoor break area
could be more effective at cooling and should be permitted; and
Whether certain conditions must be provided for these
outdoor break areas.
OSHA seeks additional comments on break areas where employers have
both indoor and outdoor work areas. See Explanation of Proposed
Requirements paragraph (e)(3), Requests for Comments.
V. Indoor Work Area Controls
Paragraph (e)(5) contains the proposed requirements for indoor work
area controls when temperatures meet or exceed the initial heat
trigger. Indoor work areas would be required to be equipped with a
combination of increased air movement and, if appropriate, de-
humidification (paragraph (e)(5)(i)); air-conditioning (paragraph
(e)(5)(ii)); or, in the case of radiant heat sources, other cooling
measures that effectively reduce employee exposure to radiant heat in
the work area (paragraph (e)(5)(iii)). The importance and effectiveness
of air-conditioning and air movement (including dehumidification) in
preventing HRIs were explained above in the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraphs (e)(3). In addition to these, OSHA is
permitting the use of other control measures for radiant heat sources
because these controls result in less heat being radiated to employees.
As discussed above in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (d)(3)(i), employers would be expected to determine which
work areas of indoor work sites, if any, are reasonably expected to
meet or exceed the initial heat trigger. For work areas at or above the
trigger, such as those near heat-generating machinery, paragraph (e)(5)
would require employers to implement work area controls. OSHA
understands that effective control methods can vary based on workspace
circumstances and the nature of the heat source and is therefore giving
employers options regarding indoor work area controls. However, each
work area with exposures at or above the initial heat trigger would
need be to be equipped with at least one control option. Additionally,
employers could choose to use a combination of control measures.
Employers could use increased air movement (e.g., fans) and, if
appropriate, de-humidification, or air-conditioning to cool the work
area under paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (ii). Under paragraph (e)(5)(i),
fans could be used to increase the air movement in the work area.
Employers could use overhead ceiling fans, portable floor fans, or
other industrial fans to comply. Employers could also increase the air
flow using natural ventilation by opening doors and windows, or vents,
to allow fresh air to flow into the space, but only when doing so would
be comparable to the use of fans. Natural ventilation would not be
acceptable if it does not produce air movement equivalent to a fan, or
if the outdoor temperature is such that natural ventilation increases
the work area temperature.
Depending on the type of work being done and the location of
employees in a facility, employers could choose to use ventilation to
cool the entire space or just those areas where employees are present.
Although paragraph (e)(5) only applies to work areas, it may be more
efficient for the employer to implement the control for an entire
space. With either strategy, the employer should consider the facility
layout, equipment placement, and potential obstructions to ensure
optimal airflow when determining where to place fans. For example, an
employer could use fans to cool a warehouse by strategically
positioning them near entrances and exits to create airflow and
facilitate the circulation of fresh air into the warehouse.
Additionally, utilizing high-velocity fans along aisles or in areas
where employees are concentrated can help dissipate heat and provide a
cooling effect. Conversely, if employees only work in a discrete
area(s) of a facility, an employer may choose to only provide fans in
those work areas. For example, the employer could place fans in the
area where employees are stationed. Adjustable fans or fans with
oscillating features could be used in those areas to allow employers to
direct airflow where it is most needed. Additionally, employers could
consider installing overhead fans or mounting fans on adjustable stands
to ensure optimal coverage and airflow distribution.
As discussed in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (e)(4), employers using fans or relying on natural
ventilation in humid environments would still be expected to decrease
humidity levels where appropriate. OSHA is not proposing a specific
temperature or humidity level be maintained in the work areas; however,
employers should ensure that the combination of air movement and
humidity level effectively reduces employees' heat strain. As discussed
in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (e)(6), OSHA
has preliminarily determined that under some conditions, fan use may be
harmful when ambient temperatures exceed 102 [deg]F and employers must
evaluate humidity levels to determine if fan use is harmful when
temperatures reach this threshold. Employers should consult the
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (e)(6) to determine
when de-humidification may be appropriate in the context of fan use.
Under paragraph (e)(5)(ii) employers could use air-conditioning to
meet the requirement for controlling heat exposures in indoor work
areas. In arid environments, evaporative coolers, also known as ``swamp
coolers,'' could be used and would be considered air-conditioners, even
if portable. It is important to note that while an employer may choose
to provide air-conditioning to the entire facility, they
[[Page 70783]]
would not be required to do so under the proposed standard. Employers
who choose to provide air-conditioning under paragraph (e)(5)(ii) would
only need to implement it in areas where employees work and are exposed
to temperatures above the initial heat trigger. Similar to fan use, if
employees only work from fixed or designated locations in the
workplace, the employer would only need to provide air-conditioning to
those spaces under paragraph (e)(5)(ii). For example, if employees work
only from a control booth or control room, employers could choose to
install air-conditioning in the control booth or control room to comply
with paragraph (e)(5)(ii). Similarly, portable air-conditioning units
could be used throughout the facility to cool smaller areas where
employees work. For example, an employer could position portable
evaporative coolers near the entrance of a loading dock to provide
immediate relief from the heat when an employee is loading or unloading
goods inside the building, or a machine shop may choose to use portable
air-conditioners around the workstation to cool the employee.
Alternatively, a manufacturing facility may choose to install a small,
air-conditioned control booth for operators to work from. All of these
options would be acceptable under the proposal.
Under paragraph (e)(5)(iii), in indoor work areas with radiant heat
sources, employers could choose to implement other measures that
effectively reduce employee exposure to radiant heat in the workplace.
Paragraph (e)(5)(iii) would allow the use of controls such as shielding
or barriers, isolation, or other measures that effectively reduce
employee exposure to radiant heat, in areas where employees are exposed
to radiant heat created by heat-generating processes. The use of
control methods for radiant heat is consistent with guidance issued by
Minnesota regarding the implementation of their heat standard (MNOSHA,
2009). Options for complying with this proposed provision could include
installing shielding or barriers that are radiant-reflecting to reduce
the amount of radiant heat to which employees would otherwise be
exposed; isolating the source of radiant heat, such as using thermal
insulation on hot pipes and surfaces; increasing the distance between
employees and the heat source; and modifying the hot process or
operation.
If the employer chooses to utilize radiant heat controls under
paragraph (e)(5)(iii) in lieu of air-conditioning or fan use, the
controls would need to effectively reduce employee exposure to radiant
heat. For example, in facilities with industrial ovens, kilns, or
process heat, employees may be exposed to radiant heat during loading,
unloading, or maintenance tasks. Installing shielding around these heat
sources can help protect employees from radiant heat during these
tasks. In another example, an employer may choose to install heat-
resistant barriers or insulating materials around welding stations to
contain heat and prevent its transmission to adjacent work areas.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and additional information regarding the use of
engineering controls for indoor work areas, including:
Whether the standard should specify how effective
engineering controls need to be in cooling the work area(s);
Whether there are other control options (besides fan use
or air-conditioning) that would be both effective at reducing heat
strain and feasible to implement in cases where indoor employees are
exposed to ambient heat; and
Whether there are work areas where maintaining a high
ambient temperature is necessary for the work process and, if so, how
OSHA should address these work areas in the standard.
VI. Evaluation of Fan Use
Paragraph (e)(6) of the proposed standard would require employers
using fans under certain conditions to determine if fan use is harmful.
Specifically, when ambient temperatures exceed 102 [deg]F (39.0
[deg]C), employers using fans to comply with paragraphs (e)(4) or (5)
would be required to evaluate the humidity levels at the work site and
discontinue the use of fans if the employer determines that fan use is
harmful.
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, researchers in the
past 10 years have increasingly evaluated the conditions under which
fan use becomes harmful, using both experimental and modeling
approaches. Most of this work has assumed individuals are seated and at
rest; to OSHA's knowledge, only one paper has evaluated the threshold
at which fans become harmful for individuals performing physical work
(Foster et al., 2022a). The impact of fans is determined by both air
temperature and humidity, as well as factors influencing sweat rates.
Researchers have demonstrated that neither heat index nor ambient
temperature alone can be used to determine beneficial versus harmful
fan use; instead, ambient temperature and relative humidity must both
be known (Morris NB et al., 2019; Foster et al., 2022a).
The 102 [deg]F threshold in proposed paragraph (e)(6) is derived
from Figure 4 of Foster et al. 2022a and represents the lowest ambient
temperature at which fan use has been demonstrated to be harmful in the
researchers' model. As proposed, paragraph (e)(6) does not specify how
employers must make the determination whether fan use is harmful above
this threshold. However, using the other results from Figure 4 of
Foster et al. 2022a, OSHA has developed the following table which
identifies scenarios where the agency believes fan use would or would
not be harmful:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fan speed: 3.5 m/s
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humidity range: Humidity range:
Ambient temperature fan use allowed turn off fans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
102.2 [deg]F (39 [deg]C)........ 15-85%............ <15% or >85%.
104.0 [deg]F (40 [deg]C)........ 20-80%............ <20% or >80%.
105.8 [deg]F (41 [deg]C)........ 30-65%............ <30% or >65%.
107.6 [deg]F (42 [deg]C)........ 30-65%............ <30% or >65%.
109.4 [deg]F (43 [deg]C)........ 35-60%............ <35% or >60%.
111.2 [deg]F (44 [deg]C)........ 35-55%............ <35% or >55%.
113.0 [deg]F (45 [deg]C)........ 40-55%............ <40% or >55%.
>113.0 [deg]F (>45 [deg]C)...... Discontinue all Discontinue all
fan use. fan use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70784]]
Using the information from this table, an employer could identify
the row most closely matching the ambient temperature of the work or
break area and then find the corresponding humidity range for when fans
are acceptable to use. For example, if the ambient temperature of the
work or break area is 104 [deg]F and the relative humidity is 50%, fans
could be used. However, if the ambient temperature of the work or break
area is 108 [deg]F and the relative humidity is 70%, fans should not be
used.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA recognizes that there are several limitations with the
analyses by Foster et al. 2022a, and the application of those results
for this purpose. For one, the model results reported by Foster et al.
assume ``light clothing'' only and not ``work clothing,'' which would
be more similar to a typical work uniform than the ``light clothing.''
While the empirical evidence that the researchers collected on
individuals wearing ``work clothing'' is largely consistent with the
modeled results presented for ``light clothing,'' there are some
differences, such as the finding that fans are never beneficial at or
above an ambient temperature of 45 [deg]C (113.0 [deg]F) when wearing
``work clothing'' (which OSHA has reflected in the table). The authors'
recommendations for fan use also included a category that represented
scenarios in which fans have a ``minimal impact'' (i.e., the effect of
fans on body heat storage is close to zero). OSHA has combined this
category with the category for scenarios in which fans are beneficial
to produce the table above. Another limitation is the assumption of a
sweat rate of approximately 1 liter per hour (the group average from
empirical trials in the same study). However, factors such as
acclimatization status, age, and medical history can influence sweat
rates, which would influence when fan use is beneficial (see Figure 6
[panels a and b] from Foster et al., 2022a). Finally, Foster et al.
tested a fan with a velocity of 3.5 meters per second. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this is a reasonable assumption but
acknowledges that varying wind velocity would also influence when fan
use is beneficial (see Figure 6 [panel c] from Foster et al., 2022a).
OSHA understands the complexity and uncertainty around an
evaluation of fan use and is therefore considering a simplified
approach for employers to use. OSHA is requesting comments on this
simplified approach and the assumptions underlying it.
More specifically, OSHA requests comments regarding its preliminary
determinations on fan use and seeks the following information:
Whether OSHA has appropriately derived recommendations for
fan use from Foster et al., 2022a, and whether additional data or
research should be used to supplement or revise the recommendations;
Whether OSHA should include the above table derived from
Foster et al., 2022a, or a similar table, in paragraph (e)(6), either
as a mandatory requirement or as a compliance option; and,
Whether the standard should require alternative methods
for cooling employees when fans are harmful, and if so, what
alternative control measures should be used.
VII. Acclimatization
Paragraph (e)(7) of the proposed standard would establish
requirements to protect new and returning employees who are not
acclimatized. Evidence indicates that new and returning employees are
at increased risk for HRIs. As explained in Section V.C., Risk
Reduction, employees who are new on the job are often overrepresented
in HRI and heat-related fatality reports. Additionally, the NACOSH Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group recommended acclimatization
protections for new and returning employees, such as heightened
monitoring (NACOSH Working Group on Heat, 2023), and NIOSH recommends
an acclimatization plan that gradually increases new employees' work in
the heat starting with 20% of the usual work duration and increasing by
no more than 20% on each subsequent day (NIOSH, 2016). For returning
employees, NIOSH recommends an acclimatization plan that starts with no
more than 50% of the usual work duration of heat exposure that then
gradually increases on each subsequent day (NIOSH, 2016). Therefore,
OSHA has preliminarily determined that the requirements in paragraph
(e)(7) are important for preventing HRIs and fatalities from
occupational heat exposures among these employees.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i) would require that employers implement
one of two options for an acclimatization protocol for new employees
during their first week on the job. The first option that an employer
may choose, under proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i)(A) (Option A), is a plan
that, at a minimum, includes the measures required at the high heat
trigger set forth in paragraph (f), when the heat index is at or above
the initial heat trigger during the employee's first week of work.
Proposed paragraph (f)(2) requires a minimum 15-minute paid rest break
at least every two hours in the break area that meets the requirements
of the proposed standard, proposed paragraph (f)(3) requires
observation for signs and symptoms of heat-related illness, and
proposed paragraph (f)(4) requires providing hazard alerts with
specified information about heat illness prevention and how to seek
help if needed. See the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (f), Requirements at the high heat trigger, for a detailed
explanation of the requirements of that section. Option A gives
employers flexibility to choose an option that works best for their
work site while still making sure that employees are informed, are
under observation, and receive breaks, all of which will help better
equip employers and employees to monitor and mitigate the effects of
heat exposure in situations where the gradual acclimatization option
may not be practical. While this option does not require gradual
exposure, OSHA believes that, in situations where gradual exposure may
not be practical, rest breaks, observation, and hazard alerts will help
protect new workers as they adjust to heat during their first week of
work.
The second option that an employer may choose, under proposed
paragraph (e)(7)(i)(B) (Option B), would require a gradual exposure to
the heat at or above the initial heat trigger to allow for
acclimatization to the heat conditions of the workplace. The gradual
exposure protocol would involve restricting employee exposure to heat
to no more than 20% of a normal work shift exposure duration on the
first day of work and increasing exposure by 20% of the work shift
exposure duration on each subsequent day from day 2 through 4. This is
consistent with NIOSH's recommended acclimatization plan for new
employees (NIOSH, 2016).
Employers may satisfy Option B requirements by utilizing some of
the employees' work time in ways that do not require exposure to heat
at or above the initial heat trigger. Examples include completing
training activities or filling out work-related paperwork in an air-
conditioned building. Employers may also fulfill this requirement
through task replacement, whereby an employee completes another
necessary task in an area that does not require exposure at or above
the initial heat trigger (e.g., office work).
Additionally, if the temperature of the work site fluctuates such
that the initial heat trigger is only exceeded for a portion (e.g., 2
hours) of the work shift
[[Page 70785]]
on some or all of the days during the initial week of work, employers
choosing Option A would only be required to implement the requirements
of paragraph (f) during those time periods. If they choose the gradual
heat exposure option for acclimatization, employers would need to
coordinate the employees' heat exposure for those days with the parts
of the day that are expected to meet or exceed the initial heat
trigger.
Under proposed paragraph (j), employers would be required to
implement the acclimatization protocols at no cost to employees. This
means that employers could not relieve employees from duty after the
allotted time of heat exposure under the acclimatization protocol and
not pay them for the remainder of the work shift. Because benefits
would also be considered compensation, this would mean that an employer
could not use an employee's paid leave to cover the hours not worked
during the acclimatization period.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(ii) would require that employers
implement one of two options for an acclimatization protocol for
returning employees who have been away from the job for more than 14
days, during their first week back on the job.
The first option that an employer may choose, under proposed
paragraph (e)(7)(ii)(A) (Option A), is an employer-developed plan, that
at a minimum, includes the measures that would be required under
proposed paragraph (f) whenever the initial heat trigger is met or
exceeded, during the employee's first week of returning to work. See
explanation above for new employees and the Explanation of Proposed
Requirements for paragraph (f), Requirements at the High Heat Trigger,
of the proposed standard for a detailed explanation of the requirements
of that section.
The second option that an employer may choose under proposed
paragraph (e)(7)(ii)(B) (Option B), is a protocol that requires a
gradual exposure to heat at or above the initial heat trigger to allow
for acclimatization to the heat conditions of the workplace. The
gradual exposure protocol would restrict employee exposure to heat to
no more than 50% of a normal work shift exposure duration on the first
day of work, 60% on the second day of work, and 80% of the third day of
work. This is consistent with NIOSH's recommended acclimatization plan
for returning employees (NIOSH, 2016). Employers may satisfy these
requirements by utilizing employees' work time in ways that do not
require heat exposure at or above the initial heat trigger, as
described above for new employees.
For occupations where returning employees may have shift schedules
such as two weeks on and then two weeks off, the acclimatization
protocol requirement would not go into effect because the two weeks off
would not exceed 14 days. However, in situations where time off exceeds
14 days, the requirement would apply.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(iii) would set forth an exception to
acclimatization requirements of paragraphs (e)(7)(i) and (ii) if the
employer can demonstrate that the employee consistently worked under
the same or similar conditions as the employer's working conditions
within the previous 14 days. Same or similar conditions means that new
employees must have been doing work tasks that are similar or higher in
level of exertion to the tasks that are required in the new job and
that they conducted these tasks in similar or hotter heat conditions
than the new job (e.g., at or above the heat index for current
conditions in the new job). Employers should not assume that employees
who recently came from climates that are perceived to be similar or
hotter (e.g., Mexico) were actually exposed to similar or hotter
conditions because climate can vary dramatically based on factors such
as elevation levels and humidity. Therefore, employers could check
weather records to determine heat indices for the location that the
employee worked at during the previous two weeks to determine if the
employee was actually exposed to conditions at least as hot as in the
new position.
In determining if tasks the employee conducted in the past two
weeks were similar or higher in level of exertion to the tasks that are
required in the new job, employers could generally consider factors
such as weight carried and intensity of activity (e.g., walking versus
climbing). For example, picking tomatoes and picking watermelons would
generally not be considered similar tasks because of the heavier weight
of the watermelons. However, picking tomatoes and picking cucumbers
could generally be considered similar tasks if other job conditions are
similar. Installing telephone wires on poles and laying out
communication wires in a trench dug using machinery would generally not
be considered similar to laying out communication wires in a trench dug
manually because of the greater work intensity involved with digging a
trench manually. Laying communication wire in a pre-dug trench and
conducting inspections on the ground might be considered similar tasks
if both tasks primarily involve walking. Landscaping work involving
weeding and laying out mulch versus hand digging trenches for drainage
systems would generally not be considered similar tasks because of the
greater work involved in digging trenches. However, hand digging
trenches for drainage and hand digging holes to install trees and
shrubs could generally be considered similar tasks if those are the
primary tasked performed throughout the workday.
The employee must have engaged in similar work activities in the
similar heat conditions consistently over the preceding 14 days. OSHA
intends ``consistently'' to mean the employee engaged in the task for
at least two hours per day on a majority of the preceding 14 days. This
aligns with recommendations from NIOSH (NIOSH, 2016).
Examples of when this exception would not apply include when new
employees' previous positions, which included similar heat conditions
and exertion levels, ended longer than 14 days ago, when new employees'
previous positions ended within the last 14 days and involved similar
work tasks but in cooler conditions, or when new employees' previous
positions ended within the last 14 days and involved hotter conditions
but less exertion. The exemption would also not apply if new employees'
previous positions ended less than 14 days ago but they were not
performing similar work tasks in similar heat conditions for at least
two hours per day on a majority of the preceding 14 days.
To demonstrate that a new employee consistently worked under the
same or similar conditions as the employer's working conditions within
the prior 14 days, the employer could obtain information directly from
the new employee to confirm the requirements of proposed paragraph
(e)(7) are met considering the explanation of same or similar working
conditions provided above. The employer could ask questions verbally or
in writing about the prior work (i.e., timing, location, duration, type
of work). If an employer asked new employees ``in the past 14 days, did
you consistently work under the same or similar conditions as the
employer'' but did not ask for any supporting details, the requirement
would not be satisfied.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Data or examples of successful implementation of an
acclimatization program;
[[Page 70786]]
Whether the term ``same or similar conditions'' is
sufficiently clear so that employers know when the exception to the
acclimatization requirement would apply for new employees, and if not,
how should OSHA clarify the requirement;
Whether a minimum amount of heat exposure to achieve
acclimatization should be specified under Option B, the gradual
acclimatization option;
Whether the requirement to demonstrate that an employee
consistently worked under the same or similar conditions as the
employer's working conditions within the prior 14 days is sufficiently
clear, and if not, how should OSHA clarify the requirement;
Whether the standard should require acclimatization
protocols during local heat waves, and if so, how OSHA should define
heat waves;
Whether the standard should require annual acclimatization
of all employees at the beginning of each heat season (e.g., the first
hot week of the year) and approaches for doing so;
Examples that OSHA should consider of acclimatization
protocols for industries or occupations where it may not be appropriate
for an employee to conduct heat-exposed work tasks during the first
week on the job (e.g., what activities would be appropriate for these
workers to achieve acclimatization);
Data or examples that OSHA should consider in determining
if acclimatization should be required in certain situations for
existing employees and examples of successful acclimatization programs
for such employees;
Which option (i.e., following requirements of the high
heat trigger or gradual increase in exposure to work in heat) presented
in the proposal would employers implement and whether the standard
should include other options;
Whether the standard should include any additional
acclimatization requirements for employees returning after less than 14
days away from work after acute illnesses that may put them at
increased risk of heat-related illness (i.e., illnesses involving fever
or gastrointestinal infections), and if so, suggestions and evidence
for the additional requirements; and
Considering that employees starting or returning when the
heat index is above 90 [deg]F would not receive unique acclimatization
benefits if the employer chose Option A, whether the standard should
specify additional requirements for these scenarios, such as breaks
that are more frequent or of longer duration.
OSHA has concerns that the proposed exception in paragraph
(e)(7)(iii) could create incentives for employees to lie and/or
employers to pressure employees to lie about their acclimatization
status. For example, an employer could pressure an employee to report
that they consistently worked under the same or similar conditions
within the prior 14 days, so that the employer does not need to comply
with paragraph (e)(7) during the employee's first week on the job.
These incentives could put new and returning employees at increased
risk because they are not receiving appropriate protection based on
their acclimatization status. OSHA seeks comments and evidence on the
likelihood of this happening and what OSHA could do to address these
potential troubling incentives.
VIII. Rest Breaks if Needed
Proposed paragraph (e)(8) would require employers to allow and
encourage employees to take paid rest breaks in break areas that would
be required under paragraphs (e)(3) or (4) if needed to prevent
overheating. As discussed in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, rest breaks
have been shown to be an effective intervention for preventing HRI by
allowing employees to reduce their work rate and body temperature. Rest
breaks allow employees time to hydrate and cool down in areas that are
shaded, air-conditioned, or cooled with other measures. Therefore, OSHA
preliminary finds that allowing employees to take rest breaks when they
are needed to prevent overheating is an important control for
preventing or reducing HRIs in the workplace.
Providing employees the opportunity to take unscheduled rest breaks
to prevent overheating helps to account for protecting employees who
vary in susceptibility to HRI and address scenarios where employees
might experience increased heat strain. For example, unscheduled rest
breaks may help to protect employees who are more susceptible to HRI
for reasons such as chronic health conditions, recent recovery from
illness, pregnancy, prior heat-related illness, or use of certain
medications (see Section IV.O., Factors that Affect Risk for Heat-
Related Health Effects). Unscheduled rest breaks may also help reduce
heat strain in employees who are assigned new job tasks that are more
strenuous than the tasks they were performing. Additionally, rest
breaks would allow employees an opportunity to remove any PPE that may
be contributing to heat strain.
Under proposed paragraph (e)(8), employees would be allowed to
decide on the timing and frequency of unscheduled rest breaks to
prevent overheating. However, unscheduled rest breaks must be heat-
related (i.e., only if needed to prevent overheating). In addition, if
the work process is such that allowing employees to leave their work
station at their election would present a hazard to the employee or
others, or if it would result in harm to the employer's equipment or
product, the employer could require the employee to notify a supervisor
and wait to be relieved, provided a supervisor is immediately available
and relieves the employee as quickly as possible.
An example of a scenario where an employee may decide they need a
rest break is if the employee experiences certain symptoms that
suggests the employee is suffering from excessive heat strain but does
not have an HRI that would need to be addressed under proposed
paragraph (g)(2) (e.g., excessive thirst, excessive sweating, or a
general feeling of unwellness that the employee attributes to heat
exposure). However, rest breaks to prevent overheating do not need to
be tied to onset of symptoms. For example, if an employee starts to
have trouble performing a task on a hot day that they do not normally
have trouble performing, that may be a sign they need a break. OSHA
expects that most unscheduled rest breaks to prevent overheating would
typically last less than 15 minutes. In some cases, a rest break that
extends beyond 15 minutes or frequent unscheduled rest breaks may be a
sign that the employee may be experiencing an HRI.
As noted, proposed paragraph (e)(8) requires employers to both
encourage and allow employees to take a paid rest break if needed.
Employers can encourage employees to take rest breaks by periodically
reminding them of that option. Although employers must allow employees
to take breaks if the employee determines one is needed, nothing
precludes an employer from asking or directing an employee to take an
unscheduled paid rest break if the employer notices signs of excessive
heat strain in an employee.
Slowing the pace of work would not be considered a rest break, and
as specified in proposed paragraph (e)(8), rest breaks if needed must
be provided in break areas required under paragraph (e)(3) or (4) (see
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraphs (e)(3), Break
area(s) at outdoor work sites and (e)(4), Break area(s) at indoor work
sites for additional discussion of break areas and Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph
[[Page 70787]]
(f)(2), Rest breaks, for additional discussion related to rest breaks.)
Proposed paragraph (e)(8) would require that employees be paid
during the time they take rest breaks needed to prevent overheating.
OSHA preliminary finds it is important that these breaks be paid so
that employees are not discouraged from taking them. The reason for
requiring these breaks be paid is further explained in the Explanation
of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (j), Requirements implemented at
no cost to employees, including the importance of the requirement and
how employers can ensure that employees are compensated to ensure they
are not financially penalized for taking breaks that would be allowed
or required under the proposed standard.
Evidence indicates that employees are often reluctant to take
breaks and thus, are not likely to abuse the right to take rest breaks
if needed to prevent overheating; to the contrary, the evidence shows
that employees are more likely to continue working when they should
take a rest break to prevent overheating. A review of the evidence
showing that many employees are reluctant to take rest breaks is
included in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph
(f)(2) Rest breaks.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA seeks comments and information on the proposed requirement to
provide employees with rest breaks if needed to prevent overheating,
including:
If there are specific signs or symptoms that indicate
employees need a rest break to prevent overheating;
If employers currently offer rest breaks if needed to
prevent overheating, and if so, whether employees take rest breaks when
needed to prevent overheating;
The typical duration of needed rest breaks taken to
prevent overheating; and
Any challenges to providing rest breaks if needed to
prevent overheating.
In addition, OSHA encourages stakeholders to provide information
and comments on the questions regarding compensation of employees
during rest breaks in the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for
paragraph (j), Requirements implemented at no cost to employees.
IX. Effective Communication
Paragraph (e)(9) of the proposed standard establishes requirements
for effective communication at the initial heat trigger. Early
detection and treatment of heat-related illness is critical to
preventing the development of potentially fatal heat-related
conditions, such as heat stroke (see Section V., Health Effects).
Effective two-way communication provides a mechanism for education and
notification of heat-related hazards so that appropriate precautions
can be taken. It also provides a way for employees to communicate with
the employer about signs and symptoms of heat-related illness, as well
as appropriate response measures (e.g., first aid, emergency response).
The NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group
recommended that elements of a proposed standard for prevention of HRIs
address communication needs to meet the objective of monitoring the
work site to accurately assess conditions and apply controls based on
those conditions. The Work Group recommended addressing communications
needs for tracking to facilitate monitoring and check-ins so that
employees can report back to employers (NACOSH Working Group on Heat,
2023).
OSHA preliminarily finds that two-way, regular communication is a
critical element of HRI prevention. Paragraph (e)(9) requires the
employer maintain effective, two-way communication with employees and
regularly communicate with employees. The means of communication must
be effective. In some cases, voice (or hand signals) may be effective,
but if that is not effective at a particular workplace (e.g., if
employees are not close together and/or not near a supervisor), then
electronic means may be needed to maintain effective communication
(e.g., handheld transceiver, phone, or radio). If the employer is
communicating with employees by electronic means, the employer must
respond in a timely manner for communication to be effective (e.g.,
providing a phone number for employees to call would not be effective
if no one answers or responds in a timely manner).
The means of communication must also be ``two-way'' (i.e., a way
for the employer to communicate with employees, and for employees to
communicate with the employer). This is important because this provides
a means for employees to reach the employer when someone is exhibiting
the signs and symptoms of heat-related illness.
Paragraph (e)(9) also requires that employers regularly communicate
with employees. The employer could comply with this requirement by
regularly reaching out to employees, or setting up a system by which
employees are required to make contact, or check in, with the employer.
However, it is the employer's responsibility to ensure that regular
communication is maintained with employees (e.g., every few hours). If
a system is chosen whereby the employer requires employees to initiate
communication with the employer, and if the employer does not hear from
the employee in a reasonable amount of time, the employer must reach
out to the employee to ensure that they are not experiencing heat-
related illness symptoms. Employers must ensure that when it is
necessary for an employee to leave a message (e.g., text) with the
employer, the employer will respond, if necessary, in a reasonable
amount of time.
This proposed requirement also applies for employees who work alone
on the work site. This means that the communication system chosen by
the employer must allow for communication between these employees and
the employer, although the means may be different than for employees
who work on a work site with multiple employees (e.g., by electronic
means).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
How employers currently communicate with employees working
alone, including any challenges for effectively communicating with
employees working alone and any situations where communication with
employees working alone may not be feasible; and
Whether OSHA should specify a specific time interval at
which employers must communicate with employees and, if so, what the
interval should be, and the basis for such a requirement.
X. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Paragraph (e)(10) of the proposed standard would require employers
to maintain the cooling properties of cooling PPE if provided to
employees. The proposed standard does not require employers to provide
employees with cooling PPE. However, if employers do provide cooling
PPE, they must ensure the PPE's cooling properties are maintained at
all times during use. It is critical that employers who provide cooling
PPE maintain the equipment's cooling properties; when these properties
are not maintained, the defective equipment can heighten the risk of
heat injury or illness with continued use. Reports from employees
indicate that the use of cooling PPE, such as cooling vests, is
burdensome and increases heat retention once the
[[Page 70788]]
cooling properties are lost or ice packs have melted (Chicas et al.,
2021).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence as to whether there are any
scenarios in which wearing cooling PPE is warranted and feasible and
OSHA should require its use.
F. Paragraph (f) Requirements at or Above the High Heat Trigger
I. Timing
Paragraph (f) of the proposed standard would establish requirements
when employees are exposed to heat at or above the high heat trigger.
As discussed in Section V.B., Basis for Initial and High Heat Triggers,
OSHA has preliminarily determined that the experimental and
observational evidence support that heat index triggers of 80 [deg]F
and 90 [deg]F are highly sensitive and therefore highly protective of
employees. Exposures at or above the high heat trigger, a heat index of
90 [deg]F, or a corresponding wet bulb globe temperature equal to the
NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit, would require the employer to provide
the protections outlined in paragraphs (f)(2) through (5). These
protections would be in addition to the measures required by paragraph
(e) Requirements at or above the initial heat trigger, which remain in
effect after the high heat trigger is met.
The employer would only be required to provide the protections
specified in paragraph (f) during the time period when employees are
exposed to heat at or above the high heat trigger. In many cases,
employees may only be exposed at or above the high heat trigger for
part of their work shift. For example, employees may begin work at 9
a.m. and finish work at 5 p.m. If their exposure is below the high heat
trigger from 9 a.m. until 2 p.m., and at or above the high heat trigger
from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., the employer would only be required to provide
the protections specified in this paragraph from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Protective measures outlined in paragraph (e) Requirements at or above
the initial heat trigger, would be required at any time when employees
are exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger.
II. Rest Breaks
Proposed paragraph (f)(2) specifies the minimum frequency and
duration for rest breaks that would be required (i.e., 15 minutes every
two hours) when the high heat trigger is met or exceeded and provides
clarification on requirements for those rest breaks.
A. Background on the Provision
As discussed in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, rest breaks have been
shown to be an effective intervention for preventing HRI by allowing
employees to reduce their work rate and body temperature. Rest breaks
also allow employees time to hydrate and cool down in areas that are
shaded, air-conditioned, or cooled with other measures. OSHA
preliminarily finds there are at least two reasons that warrant the
inclusion of rest breaks at a minimum frequency and duration when the
high heat trigger is met or exceeded. The first is that heat strain is
greater in employees exposed to higher levels of heat. (See Section
IV., Health Effects).
The second is that the available evidence shows many employees are
not taking adequate or enough rest breaks. This evidence shows that
while workers paid on a piece-rate basis (e.g., compensated based on
factors such as quantity of produce picked, jobs completed, or products
produced) may be especially reluctant to take breaks because of
financial concerns (Lam et al., 2013; Mizelle et al., 2022; Iglesias-
Rios et al., 2023; Spector et al., 2015; Wadsworth et al., 2019), a
significant portion of employees paid on an hourly basis are also not
taking adequate breaks for other reasons such as pressure from co-
workers or supervisors, high work demands, or attitudes related to work
ethics (Arnold et al., 2020; Wadsworth et al., 2019). For example,
Langer et al. (2021) surveyed 507 Latinx California farmworkers (77%
paid hourly) during the summers of 2014 and 2015, when California
regulations to protect employees from heat required employers to
provide rest breaks if needed but did not require rest breaks at a
minimum frequency and duration; 39% of surveyed employees reported
taking fewer than 2 rest breaks (not including lunch) per day.
Additionally, in a study of 165 legally employed child Latinx farm
employees (64% hourly workers) ranging in age from 10-17 years in North
Carolina, 88% reported taking breaks in shade, but based on some
interviews, the breaks appeared to be of short duration (e.g., ``for
some five minutes;'' ``you can take a break whenever you want . . . not
for a long time . . . if you wanna get a drink of water only for a
couple of minutes, three or five'') (Arnold et al., 2020). The children
who were interviewed by Arnold et al. (2020) reported pressure to keep
up with the pace of work and being discouraged to take breaks by co-
workers or supervisors. In interviews of 405 migrant farmworkers in
Georgia, 20% reported taking breaks in the shade (Fleischer et al.,
2013).
In a study of 101 farmworkers (61% paid hourly) in the Florida/
Georgia region, Luque et al. (2020) reported that only 23% took breaks
in the shade. The need for breaks was supported by observations that
while some employees carried water bottles, most were only seen
drinking during rest breaks. In another study, focus group discussions
with piece-rate farm employees revealed that many expressed concerns
about possible losses in earnings and that they might be replaced by
another employee if they took breaks. Many such employees brought their
own water to work to reduce the time they are not picking produce
(Wadsworth et al., 2019). In that same study by Wadsworth et al.
(2019), piece rate farmworkers also described ``their desire to be seen
as a good worker, with great fortitude.'' Good workers were described
by the farmworkers as those who ``work fast and do not slow things down
and jeopardize success for the group. They continue working in spite of
the conditions or how they feel.'' (Wadsworth et al., 2019, p. 224). A
case study highlighted in the NIOSH criteria document discusses a
migrant farmworker who died from HRI after he continued to work despite
a supervisor instructing him to take a break because he was working
slowly (NIOSH 2016, pp. 46-47). On the day of his death, the heat index
ranged from 86 to 112 [deg]F.
Evidence supporting the need for required rest breaks is not
limited to farmworkers. For example, a NIOSH health hazard evaluation
(HHE) indicated that truck drivers for an airline catering facility
often skipped breaks they were allowed to take between deliveries in an
air-conditioned room at the catering facility to keep up with job
demands (NIOSH, 2016, p. 44). Such attitudes appear common in employees
of all sectors. Phan and Beck (2023) surveyed 107 office workers, and
25-33% of those employees reported they skipped breaks because of a
high workload, not wanting to lose momentum, or to reduce the amount of
work to be completed in the future. A number of informal surveys
reported similar findings for office and remote workers. In those
surveys, many employees (approximately 40%) skip some breaks,
particularly lunch breaks (Tork, June 14, 2021; Joblist, July 5, 2022).
Common reasons for skipping lunch breaks included work demands and
feelings of guilt or being judged for taking a break (Tork, June 14,
2021; Joblist, July 5, 2022). One survey also reported that a major
reason why many employees do not take paid time off is
[[Page 70789]]
because of concerns for coworkers (Joblist, July 5, 2022). Although
these informal surveys cover employees who would likely not be covered
by the scope of this proposed standard, these informal surveys echo the
findings of the studies in the preceding paragraphs and show that
employees generally do not take rest breaks or other paid time off.
Studies of presenteeism (i.e., working while ill or injured)
suggest that employees may be more likely to ignore signs of excessive
heat strain than they are to take breaks needed to prevent overheating.
Hemp (October 2004, pp. 3-4) stated ``[u]nderlying the research of
presenteeism is the assumption that employees do not take their jobs
lightly, that most of them need and want to continue working if they
can.'' Although financial reasons such as lack of paid leave are often
drivers of presenteeism, non-financial considerations also play a major
role. One study analyzed presenteeism in many of the industries covered
by the proposed standard including in the categories of agriculture,
utilities, manufacturing, transportation and storage, and construction
(Marklund et al., 2021). Non-financially related reasons for
presenteeism reported by Marklund et al. (2021) were not wanting to
burden coworkers, perception that no one else can do the work,
enjoyment of work, not wanting to be perceived as lazy or unproductive,
and pride. Similar reasons were reported in other studies including
wanting to spare co-workers from additional work, pressure from
coworkers, strong teamwork and good relationships with coworkers,
examples set by management, institutional loyalty, or a perception that
taking time off is underperformance (Garrow, February 2016; Lohaus et
al., 2022).
The proposed requirement to include mandatory rest breaks is
consistent with recommendations by authoritative sources. For example,
NIOSH recommends mandatory rest breaks (NIOSH, 2016, p. 45; NIOSH,
2017b, p.1). Additionally, ACGIH (2023) lists ``appropriate breaks with
shade'' as an essential element of a heat stress management program.
The NACOSH Working Group on Heat also recommended that scheduled,
mandatory rest breaks be provided without retaliation (NACOSH Working
Group on Heat, 2023, pp. 6-7).
OSHA examined a number of studies to determine an appropriate
frequency and duration of rest breaks. First, a series of laboratory
studies by Notley et al. (2021; 2022a, b) provide insight on the
appropriate frequency of rest breaks. In those studies, unacclimatized
participants wearing a single clothing layer exercised at a moderate
intensity level until stay time was reached (i.e., core temperatures
reached 38 [deg]C (100.4 [deg]F) or increased by at least 1 [deg]C) at
various ambient temperatures and at a relative humidity of 35% (Notley
et al., 2021; 2022a, b).\1\ In a study of younger (18-30 years old) and
older men (50-70 years old), data from all participants were pooled to
calculate initial stay times of 111 minutes at ambient conditions of
34.1 [deg]C (93.4 [deg]F) (heat index = 93.9 [deg]F) and 44 minutes at
ambient conditions of 41.4 [deg]C (106.5 [deg]F) (heat index = 119.8
[deg]F) (Notley et al., 2022b). In a study of unacclimatized younger
men (mean age 22 years), older men (mean age 58 years), and older men
with diabetes (mean age 60 years) or hypertension (mean age 61 years),
median stay times were 128 minutes at 36.6 [deg]C (97.9 [deg]F) (heat
index = 101.5 [deg]F) and 68 minutes at 41.1 [deg]C (106.5 [deg]F)
(heat index = 118.5 [deg]F) (Notley et al., 2021). In a third study,
unacclimatized men and women were able to work for a median time of 117
minutes at 36.6 [deg]C (97.9 [deg]F) (heat index = 101.5 [deg]F) and 63
minutes at 41.4 [deg]C (106.5 [deg]F) (heat index = 119.8 [deg]F)
(Notley et al., 2022a). Overall, the results of these studies support
work times ranging from 111 minutes to 128 minutes at heat indices of
93.9 [deg]F to 101.5 [deg]F and 44 to 68 minutes at heat indices of
118.5 [deg]F to 119.8 [deg]F.
Two laboratory studies support a preliminary conclusion that rest
breaks contribute to the protection of workers from the effects of heat
(Uchiyama et al., 2022; Smallcombe et al., 2022). These studies were
conducted over periods that could represent all or part of a workday,
with light exertion exercise conducted under hot conditions (e.g., 37
;C (98.6 [deg]F) and 40% relative humidity (heat index = 106 [deg]F))
in Uchiyama et al. (2022), and moderate to heavy exertion exercise
conducted under four conditions: 15 [deg]C (59 [deg]F) and 50% relative
humidity (referent group, heat index not relevant), 35 [deg]C (95
[deg]F) 50% relative humidity (heat index = 105 [deg]F); 40[deg]C (104
[deg]F) and 50% relative humidity (heat index = 131 [deg]F); and 40
[deg]C (104 [deg]F), and 70% relative humidity (heat index=161 [deg]F)
in Smallcombe et al. (2022). In both studies, breaks were provided in
air-conditioned or cooler areas. The studies show little evidence of
excessive heat strain in participants as mean core temperatures
remained within 1 [deg]C of 37.5 [deg]C (99.5 [deg]C) (ACGIH, 2023, p.
244). Uchiyama et al. (2022) evaluated two work/rest protocols,
including one in which participants exercised for 1 hour, rested for 30
minutes, exercised for 1 hour, rested for 15 minutes, and then
exercised for another hour; increases in mean core temperatures were
less than 1 [deg]C above mean baseline temperature (37.2 [deg]C) in
five of the six time points reported and slightly exceeded a 1 [deg]C
increase at 180 minutes, the final time point of measurement (38.29
[deg]C). OSHA finds these work/rest cycles to be similar to a late
morning period of work, followed by a 30-minute lunch and then an early
afternoon work/rest period, although acknowledges that the duration
between rest periods is longer in the proposed rule than in this study.
Also, in the Uchiyama et al. (2022) study, a lack of heat strain was
also observed in a protocol consisting of 1 hour of work and 15 minutes
rest, followed by three half hour work periods separated by 10-minute
rest periods and, and a final half hour work period.
The Smallcombe et al. (2022) study most closely reflected a typical
workday because it was conducted over a 7-hour period with cycles of
50-minute work/10-minute rest and a 1-hour lunch. Participants were
tested under one referent conditions and three hot temperature
conditions and average rectal temperature remained at or below 38
[deg]C (100.4 [deg]F) in all groups during each exercise period at heat
indices ranging from 105 [deg]F to 161 [deg]F (table S2).
Overall, OSHA preliminarily finds that these studies show that 15-
minute rest breaks would offer more protection for employees than
shorter duration rest breaks, because the frequency of rest breaks in
these studies by Uchiyama et al. (2022) and Smallcombe et al. (2022)
was greater than what OSHA is proposing and rest breaks were provided
in air-conditioned or cooler areas. OSHA expects some employees will
not have access to air-conditioned areas during break periods. OSHA
acknowledges uncertainties in determining a precise rest break
frequency and duration, but preliminarily concludes that a minimum of a
15-minute rest break every two hours would be highly protective in many
circumstances at or above the high heat trigger, while offering
employers administrative convenience. For example, other approaches
such as adjusting rest break frequency and duration based on weather
conditions, work intensity, or protective clothing are likely to be
difficult for many employers to implement. A 15-minute break every two
hours is administratively convenient to implement because, as explained
below, a standard meal break could qualify as a rest break, and
[[Page 70790]]
therefore, assuming an 8-hour workday with a meal break in the middle
of the day, paragraph (f)(2) would only require two other breaks, one
break in the morning and a second break in the afternoon, assuming the
high heat trigger is met or exceeded the entire day.
The frequency and duration of these proposed rest breaks are within
the ranges of frequencies and durations required by four U.S. States
that have finalized regulations protecting against HRI by requiring
rest breaks under high heat conditions. First, the California
regulation for outdoor employees requires a minimum ten-minute rest
period every two hours for agricultural employees, when temperatures
reach or exceed 95 [deg]F (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, section 3395
(2024)). Second and similarly, the Colorado regulation for agricultural
employees requires a minimum 10-minute rest period every two hours
under increased risk conditions that include a temperature at or above
95 [deg]F (7 Colo. Code Regs. section 1103-15:3 (2023)). Third, in
Oregon rules applying to agriculture as well as indoor and outdoor
workplaces, employers can select from three different options for work-
rest periods at high heat, including: (1) an employer-designed program
with a minimum of a 10-minute break every two hours at a heat index of
90 [deg]F or greater and a 15-minute break every hour at a heat index
of 100 [deg]F or greater, with possible increased frequency and
duration of breaks based on PPE use, clothing, relative humidity, and
work intensity; (2) development of work/rest schedules based on the
approach recommended by NIOSH (see NIOSH, 2016), or (3) a simplified
rest break schedule that calls for a 10-minute break every two hours,
with durations and frequencies of rest breaks increasing with increases
in heat index (Or. Admin. R. 437-002-0156 (2024); Or. Admin. R. 437-
004-1131 (2024)). Fourth and finally, for outdoor workplaces,
Washington requires a minimum 10-minute rest period every two hours at
an air temperature at or above 90 [deg]F and a minimum 15-minute rest
period every hour at an air temperature at or above 100 [deg]F (Wash.
Admin. Code 296-307-09747 (2023)).
A NIOSH guidance document recommends work/rest cycles for employees
wearing ``normal clothing'' that considers temperature adjusted for
humidity levels and cloud cover and work intensity; in that guidance,
when the need for rest cycles is triggered, work/rest cycles range from
45 minutes work/15 minutes rest to 15 minutes work/45 minutes rest,
with extreme cautioned urged under some conditions (NIOSH, 2017b).
OSHA acknowledges the requirements of some States and
recommendations by NIOSH to increase frequency and duration of rest
breaks as heat conditions increase, but OSHA has preliminarily decided
on a more simplified approach, in part because of implementation
concerns raised by stakeholders, such as difficulty in implementing a
more complex approach (e.g., longer and more frequent rest breaks with
increasing temperature), and interference with certain types of work
tasks (e.g., continuous production work and tasks such as pouring
concrete that could be disrupted by more frequent breaks). In addition,
the requirement to continue providing paid breaks if needed above the
high heat trigger, coupled with the requirement to encourage employees
to take these breaks, will help ensure that any employee that needs an
additional break can take one. However, OSHA acknowledges that, for the
reasons discussed above, this encouragement may become more vital as
the temperature increases to ensure that employees don't forego the
breaks they are entitled to. OSHA welcomes comment and data on the
appropriateness of this approach.
B. Complying With Rest Break Provisions
The required break periods under paragraph (f)(2) are a minimum.
Nothing in the proposed standard would preclude employers from
providing longer or more frequent breaks. Additionally, employers would
need to comply with paragraph (e)(8) (i.e., providing rest breaks if
needed to prevent overheating), which may include situations where
employees need more frequent or longer break periods. Paragraph (f)(2)
requires employers to ensure that employees have at least one break
that lasts a minimum of 15 minutes every two hours when the high heat
trigger is met or exceeded. The requirement is in addition to
employers' obligation under paragraph (e)(8) to allow and encourage
rest breaks if needed to prevent overheating, which continues after the
high heat trigger is met. However, if an employee takes a rest break
under paragraph (e)(8) that lasts at least 15 consecutive minutes, that
would impact when the employer would next need to provide a break under
paragraph (f)(2). For example, if the high heat trigger is exceeded for
an entire 8-hour work day, and the employee takes a 15-minute break
after their first hour of work because they need one to prevent
overheating, the employer would not be required to provide another 15-
minute break under paragraph (f)(2) for the next two hours. However,
the employer's on-going obligation under paragraph (e)(8) would remain.
Employers would also need to comply with paragraph (g)(2) (i.e.,
relieving an employee from duty when they are experiencing signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness).
Under proposed paragraph (f)(2), when the high heat trigger is met
or exceeded, employers would be required to provide a minimum 15-minute
paid rest break at least every two hours in the break area that would
be required under paragraph (e)(3) or (4). These rest breaks would be
mandatory, and the employer would need to ensure that rest breaks are
taken as required.
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2) and (e)(8) would require that employees
be paid during rest breaks. As discussed further in the Explanation of
Proposed Requirements for paragraph (j), Requirements implemented at no
cost to employees, OSHA finds it important that employees be paid
during the time they are taking breaks that are mandatory or needed to
prevent overheating so that employees are not financially penalized and
thus discouraged from taking advantage of those protections. See
Explanation of Proposed Requirements for paragraph (j) for Requirements
implemented at no cost to employees for a discussion of approaches
employers can take to ensure that both hourly employees and piece rate
employees are compensated for time on rest breaks.
Rest breaks are not the same as slowing down or pacing. In
addition, performing a sedentary work activity, even if done in an area
that meets the requirements of a break area under proposed paragraphs
(e)(3) or (4), would not be considered a rest break under the proposed
standard. This ensures that employees can rest (thus modulating
increases in heat strain) and hydrate during that rest break.
OSHA recognizes that providing a rest break every two hours might
be challenging for some employers. However, employers could consider
approaches such as staggering employee break times, within the required
two-hour period, to ensure that some employees are always available to
continue working. In other cases, employers who have concerns about
employee safety, such as having to climb up and down from high
locations to take a break, might be able to provide portable shade
structures, if safe to use under the conditions (e.g., elevation, wind
conditions). In addition, employers could consider scheduling work
tasks during cooler parts of the day to avoid required rest breaks.
[[Page 70791]]
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2)(i) indicates that a meal break that is
not required to be paid under law may count as a rest break. Whether a
meal break must be paid is governed by other laws, including State
laws. Under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act, bona fide meal
periods (typically 30 minutes or more) generally do not need to be
compensated as work time (see 29 CFR 785.19). The employee must be
completely relieved from duties for the purpose of eating regular
meals. Furthermore, an employee is not relieved if they are required to
perform any duties, whether active or inactive, while eating.
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (iii) further clarify that total
time of the rest break would not include the time that employees take
to put on and remove PPE or the time to walk to and from the break
area. OSHA preliminarily finds it important to exclude this time from
the 15-minute rest period so employees have the full 15 minutes to cool
down.
C. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Stakeholders' experiences with rest breaks required under
law or by the employer, including successes and challenges with such
approaches;
Whether there is additional evidence to support a 15-
minute rest break every 2 hours as effective in reducing heat strain
and preventing HRIs;
Whether OSHA should consider an alternative scheme for the
frequency and/or duration of rest breaks under paragraph (f)(2). If so,
what factors (such as weather conditions, intensity of work tasks, or
types of clothing/PPE) should it be based on and why;
Whether varying frequency and duration of rest breaks
based on factors such as the heat index would be administratively
difficult for employers to implement and how any potential
administrative concerns could be addressed;
Whether employees could perform certain sedentary work
activities in areas that meet the proposed requirements for break areas
without hindering the effectiveness of rest breaks for preventing HRI,
including examples of activities that would or would not be acceptable;
and
Whether OSHA should require removal of PPE that may impair
cooling during rest breaks.
III. Observation for Signs and Symptoms
Paragraph (f)(3) of the proposed standard would establish
requirements for observing employees for signs and symptoms of heat-
related illness when the high heat trigger is met or exceeded. As
explained in Section IV., Health Effects, heat-related illnesses can
progress to life-threatening conditions if not treated properly and
promptly. Therefore, it is important to identify the signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness early so appropriate action can be taken to
prevent the condition from worsening. OSHA preliminarily finds that
observation for signs and symptoms of heat-related illness in employees
is a critical component of heat injury and illness prevention.
NIOSH recommends observation for signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness by a fellow worker or supervisor (NIOSH, 2016). The NACOSH Heat
Injury and Illness Prevention Work Group also provided recommendations
related to observation for signs and symptoms of heat-related illness
in its recommendations to OSHA on potential elements of heat injury and
illness prevention standard. The NACOSH Work Group recommended that
there be additional requirements for workers who work alone since a
buddy system is not possible in those cases, including a communication
system with regular check-ins (NACOSH Working Group on Heat, 2023).
Paragraph (f)(3) would require that the employer implement at least
one of two methods of observing employees for signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness, with a third option for employees who work alone
at a work site. As defined under proposed paragraph (b), Signs and
symptoms of heat related illness means the physiological manifestations
of a heat-related illness and includes headache, nausea, weakness,
dizziness, elevated body temperature, muscle cramps, and muscle pain or
spasms.
The first option, under proposed paragraph (f)(3)(i), that an
employer may choose is to implement a mandatory buddy system in which
co-workers observe each other. Employers could satisfy this requirement
by pairing employees as ``buddies'' to observe each other for signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness. Co-workers assigned as buddies would
need to be in the same work area so that it is possible for them to
observe each other. Co-workers could also use visual cues or signs and/
or verbal communication to communicate signs and symptoms of heat-
related illness to each other.
The second option, under proposed paragraph (f)(3)(ii), that the
employer may choose is for observation to be carried out by a
supervisor or heat safety coordinator. If the employer chooses this
option, proposed paragraph (f)(3)(ii) specifies that no more than 20
employees can be observed per supervisor or heat safety coordinator.
OSHA preliminarily finds that it is important to limit the number of
employees being observed to ensure that each employee is receiving the
amount of observation needed to determine if they are experiencing any
signs and symptoms of heat-related illness. Supervisors or heat safety
coordinators would need to be in a position to observe the employees
they are responsible for observing for signs and symptoms (e.g., in
close enough proximity to communicate with and see) when observing for
signs/symptoms. The supervisor or heat safety coordinator could have
other tasks or work responsibilities while implementing the observation
role, but they must be able to be within close enough proximity to
communicate with and see those they are observing and be able to check
in with the employee regularly (e.g., every two hours). When the high
heat trigger is met, employers would still be responsible for meeting
the proposed requirements of paragraph (e)(9), Effective Communication.
Employees need to have a means of effective communication with a
supervisor (e.g., phone, radio) and employers must regularly
communicate with employees at or above both the initial and high heat
triggers.
Because symptoms of heat-related illness may not be outwardly
visible (e.g., nausea, headache), employers should ensure employees are
asked if they are experiencing any signs and symptoms. This is
especially true if the employee shows changes in behavior such as
working more slowly or dropping things because this could indicate that
the employee is experiencing heat-related illness but not recognizing
it. It is also important that employees report any signs and symptoms
they are experiencing or that they observe in others in order to
prevent development of potentially life-threatening forms of heat-
related illness (see proposed paragraph (h)(1)(x), Training).
Additionally, as discussed below, certain signs and symptoms indicate a
heat-related emergency.
Employees who work alone at a work site do not have a co-worker,
supervisor, or heat safety coordinator present who can observe them to
determine if they are experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness. For employees working alone at a work site, the employer would
instead need to comply with proposed paragraph (f)(3)(iii) and maintain
a means of effective, two-way communication with those employees and
make contact with them at least
[[Page 70792]]
every two hours. This means that employers must not only reach out to
lone employees, but also receive a communication back from the
employees. Receiving communication back from the employee allows the
employee to report any symptoms. If no communication is received, this
may be a sign that the employee is having a problem.
Under proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iv), employers would be required to
train employees on signs and symptoms of heat-related illness and which
ones require immediate emergency action. Proposed paragraph (b) defines
signs and symptoms of a heat emergency as physiological manifestations
of a heat-related illness that requires emergency response and includes
loss of consciousness (i.e., fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting irrationally or disoriented,
having convulsions, and (even after resting) having an elevated heart
rate. Employer obligations when an employee is experiencing signs and
symptoms of a heat-related illness or heat emergency are addressed
under proposed paragraph (g).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Stakeholders' experiences with implementing observational
systems such as those that OSHA is proposing and examples of the
implementation of other observational systems for signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness that OSHA should consider;
Data of the effectiveness of such observation systems;
The frequency at which observation as described in this
section should occur;
Whether there are alternative definitions of signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness that OSHA should consider;
Whether employers should be able to select a designee to
implement observation in situations where it may not be possible to
have a supervisor or heat safety coordinator present;
Possible logistical concerns regarding proposed
requirements for communication at least every two hours for employees
who work alone at the work site; whether there are examples of
successful implementation of these types of communication systems;
examples of the types of technologies or modes of communication that
most effectively support this type communication; and whether there are
innovative approaches for keeping employees working alone safe from HRI
and allowing for prompt response in an emergency; and
For employees who work alone at the work site, whether the
employer should know the location of the employee at all times.
IV. Hazard Alert
Paragraph (f)(4) of the proposed standard would require employers
to issue a hazard alert to employees prior to a work shift or when
employees are exposed to heat at or above the high heat trigger.
As explained in Section IV., Health Effects, hazardous heat can
lead to sudden and traumatic injuries and heat-related illnesses can
quickly progress to life threatening forms if not treated properly and
promptly. To protect employees, it is not sufficient to respond to HRIs
after they occur. Prevention of HRIs is critical. A hazard alert will
help prevent HRIs by notifying employees of heat hazards, providing
information on HRI prevention, empowering employees to utilize
preventative measures, and providing practical information about how to
access prevention resources (e.g., drinking water, break areas to cool
down) and seek help in case of emergency.
Heat alert programs have been identified as important prevention
strategies (NIOSH, 2016; Khogali, 1997). NIOSH identified heat alert
programs as a strategy to prevent excessive heat stress and recommended
that heat alert programs be implemented under certain high heat
conditions (NIOSH, 2016, p. 10). NIOSH further describes an example of
an effective heat alert program, drawing in part on recommendations
described by Dukes-Dobos (1981). Effective elements of a hazard alert
program include similar elements to the proposed provision (f)(4), such
as ``Establish[ing] criteria for the declaration of a heat alert'' and
``Procedures to be followed during the state of [the] [h]eat [a]lert''
(e.g., reminding employees to drink water) (NIOSH, 2016, pp. 80-81).
Employees may face pressure or incentives to work through hazardous
heat which can increase their risk of heat-related illness; some
employees also may not recognize that they are developing signs and
symptoms of a heat-related illness (see Section IV., Health Effects).
The hazard alert provision would require that employers provide
information about prevention measures, including employees' right to
take rest breaks if needed, at the employees' election, and the rest
breaks required by paragraph (f)(2), which will empower employees to
utilize the preventative measures available. This requirement would
also enable effective response in the event of a heat emergency by
requiring employers to remind employees in advance of its heat
emergency procedures.
OSHA preliminarily finds that the hazard alert requirement in
proposed paragraph (f)(4) is an important strategy for the prevention
of HRIs. The provision includes minimum requirements for the hazard
alert and provides flexibility for employers in how they implement the
provision. Additionally, employers may choose to include additional
information in the alert that is appropriate for their work sites.
Paragraph (f)(4) would require that prior to the work shift or upon
determining the high heat trigger is met or exceeded, the employer must
notify employees of specific information relevant to the prevention of
heat hazards. Specifically, the employer would be required to notify
employees of the following: the importance of drinking plenty of water;
employees' right to, at employees' election, take rest breaks if needed
and the rest breaks required by paragraph (f)(2); how to seek help and
the procedures to take in a heat emergency; and for mobile work sites,
information on the location of break area(s) required by paragraph
(e)(3) or (4) and drinking water required by paragraph (e)(2). Because
the location of break area(s) and drinking water may change frequently
for mobile work sites, it is important to make sure employees at those
work sites are reminded of their location on high heat days. Mobile
work sites include work sites that change as projects progress or when
employees relocate to a new project (e.g., landscaping, construction).
Paragraph (f)(4) would require the employer to issue the hazard
alert prior to the work shift or upon determining the high heat trigger
is met or exceeded. However, issuing the alert prior to the start of
the work shift would not be required unless exposures will be at or
above the high heat trigger at the start of the work shift. If the
start of the work shift is below the high heat trigger and the hazard
alert is not issued at the start of the work shift, then the hazard
alert must be issued when the high heat trigger is met and ideally
before exposure occurs. For example, if a work shift runs from 8 a.m.
to 5 p.m. and the high heat trigger is not met until 10 a.m., the
employer must either issue the alert at the beginning of the work
shift, or issue the alert when the high heat
[[Page 70793]]
trigger is met at 10 a.m. If an employer regularly communicates with an
employee via a particular means of communication and uses that form of
communication to issue the alert, then the employer can presume the
notification was received. If, however, the employer has reason to
believe the hazard alert was not received, they would need to take
additional steps to confirm.
Employers could satisfy the requirements of this provision by
posting signs with the required information at locations readily
accessible and visible to employees. For example, some employers may
choose to post signs at the entrance to the work site. Signs are not an
option for all employers as they may not be sufficient to ensure
employees receive the hazard alert (e.g., employers with mobile
employees or employees who work alone on a work site). Additionally,
signs may not be an option for employers who choose not to provide the
hazard alert at the start of the work shift. For example, posting a
sign at the entrance to the work site would not be sufficient to ensure
employees are notified after all employees have already entered the
work site. Employers may also satisfy the hazard alert notification
requirement by issuing the alert electronically (e.g., via email, text
message) or through verbal means (e.g., an in-person meeting, radio or
voicemail). Employers may be able to use the system they have in place
to meet the requirements of paragraph (e)(9) for effective, two-way
communication with employees to issue the hazard alert.
For any method the employer chooses to issue the hazard alert
notification, the hazard alert must be sufficient to ensure all
employees are notified of the information in paragraphs (f)(2)(i)
through (iv). To ensure this, the hazard alert must be issued in
languages and at a literacy level understood by employees.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether any additional information should be required in
the hazard alert;
The frequency of the hazard alert, particularly in
locations that frequently exceed the high heat trigger; and
Any alternatives to a hazard alert requirement that OSHA
should consider.
V. Excessively High Heat Areas
Paragraph (f)(5) of the proposed standard would require that
employers place warning signs at indoor work areas with ambient
temperatures that regularly exceed 120 [deg]F. The warning signs must
be legible, visible, and understandable to employees entering the work
area. Specifying the requirement for warning signs ensures that all
employees and contractors at the work site are aware of areas with
excessively high heat. Warning signs signal a hazardous situation that,
if not avoided, could result in death or serious injury and, if
employees need to enter the areas, serve as a reminder to take
appropriate precautions.
The warning signs must be legible, visible, and understandable to
employees entering the work areas. The sign must be in a location that
employees can clearly see before they enter the excessively high heat
area. To maintain visibility of the warning signs, employers must
ensure that there is adequate lighting in the area to read the signs
and that the signs are not blocked by items that would prevent
employees from seeing them. The signs would have to be legible (e.g.,
writing or print that can be read easily). The proposed standard does
not specify contents of the sign, but signs could include a signal word
such as ``Danger'', the hazard (e.g., ``High Heat Area''), possible
health effects (e.g., May Cause Heat-Related Illness or Death),
information pertaining to who is permitted to access the area (e.g.,
Authorized Personnel Only), and what precautions entrants would have to
take to safely enter the area. Employees must be able to understand the
signs. Therefore, the signs must be printed in a language or languages
that all potentially exposed employees understand. If it is not
practical to provide signs in a language or languages spoken by all
employees, employers still must ensure all employees understand what
the signs mean. Employers could do this by training on what the warning
signs mean and providing those employees with information regarding the
extent of the hazardous area as indicated on the signs.
Employers would have to place warning signs at indoor work areas
with ambient temperatures that regularly exceed 120 [deg]F. The term
``regularly'' means a pattern or frequency of occurrence rather than
isolated incidents. This would mean that the indoor work areas
experience temperatures exceeding 120 [deg]F on a frequent or recurring
basis, such as daily during certain seasons or under specific
operational conditions. The process of identifying heat hazards
pursuant to proposed paragraph (d) may help employers identify
excessively high heat areas. Under proposed paragraph (d)(3), employers
would be required to identify each work area(s) where employees are
reasonably expected to be exposed to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger and develop a monitoring plan. If, while monitoring, an
employer determines temperatures in an indoor work area regularly
exceed the 120 [deg]F threshold, then the employer would need to ensure
that warning signs are placed at that work area to alert employees to
the potential hazards associated with such extreme temperatures.
If an employer's work site contains an excessively high heat
area(s), the employer must train employees in the procedures to follow
when working in these areas (see proposed provision (h)(1)(xvi)).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether OSHA should further specify the required location
of warning signs;
Whether OSHA should specify the wording/contents of the
warning signs; and
Whether OSHA should consider defining ``excessively high
heat area'' as something other than a work area in which ambient
temperatures regularly exceed 120 [deg]F; and evidence available to
support a different temperature threshold or other defining criteria.
G. Paragraph (g) Heat Illness and Emergency Response and Planning
Paragraph (g) of the proposed standard would establish requirements
for heat illness and emergency response and planning. It would require
that employers develop and implement a heat emergency response plan as
part of their HIIPP, as well as specify what an employer's
responsibilities would be if an employee experiences signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness or a heat emergency. Effective planning and
emergency response measures can minimize the severity of heat-related
illnesses when they occur and allow for more efficient access to
medical care when needed.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1) specifies that the employer would be
required to develop and implement a heat emergency response plan as
part of their HIIPP and specifies the elements that would be required
in an employer's emergency response plan. Because the emergency
response plan is part of the HIIPP, some of the requirements in
paragraph (c) are relevant to the emergency response plan. For example,
the employer would need to seek the input and involvement of non-
[[Page 70794]]
managerial employees and their representatives, if any, in the
development and implementation of the emergency response plan (see
proposed paragraph (c)(6)). See Explanation of Proposed Requirements
for paragraph (c), for a detailed explanation of the requirements that
apply to the HIIPP. Only one plan would be required for each employer
(i.e., for the whole company). However, if the employer has multiple
work sites that are distinct from each other, the plan would be
tailored to each work site or type of work site. For instance, if an
employer has employees engaged in work activities outdoors on a farm,
as well as employees loading and unloading product from vehicles at
various locations, the employer could have one emergency response plan
with the specifications for each of these types of work sites
represented. Employers may also choose to include other elements in the
plan to account for any work activities unique to their workplace.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(i) would require employers to include a
list of emergency phone numbers (e.g., 911, emergency services) in
their emergency response plan. Indicating the most appropriate phone
number(s) to contact in the case of an emergency helps ensure medical
support and assistance are provided timely and efficiently during a
heat emergency. Examples of other phone numbers for assistance aside
from 911 that employers might include in the plan are those for on-site
clinicians or nurses to be contacted if an employee is experiencing
signs and symptoms of a heat-related illness.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(ii) would require employers to include a
description of how employees can contact a supervisor and emergency
medical services in their emergency response plan. Because time is of
the essence in emergency situations, it is important that employees
know beforehand how to contact a supervisor and emergency medical
services in the event of a heat emergency. For example, if employees do
not have phone service or access to a phone to call for medical help,
but they do have access to other means of communication such as radios,
walkie-talkies, personal locator beacons, and audio signals, the
employer's plan would describe how to use these other means of
communication to contact a supervisor and emergency medical services.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(iii) would require the emergency response
plan to include the individual(s) designated to ensure that heat
emergency procedures are invoked when appropriate. Clearly assigning
this responsibility to an individual(s) can reduce confusion and allow
for swift action in the event of a heat emergency. Employers with
multiple work sites or dispersed work areas may not be able to ensure
heat emergency procedures are invoked without designating different
individuals for each work site/area. For example, an employer with work
activities inside two factories in different geographic locations would
need to designate an individual(s) to ensure heat emergency procedures
are invoked at each factory location.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(iv) would require the emergency response
plan to have a description of how to transport employees to a place
where they can be reached by an emergency medical provider. Planning
for where employees can access emergency medical services can ensure
aid is provided efficiently. This is especially important for employers
with employees engaging in work activities in remote locations, where
medical services cannot reach them. For example, an employee working in
an area of a farm not easily accessible by vehicle or an employee in a
difficult to reach location inside a building being constructed.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(v) would require the emergency response
plan to include clear and precise directions to the work site,
including the address of the work site, which can be provided to
emergency dispatchers. For certain work sites that are remote/hard to
reach or do not have an address, GPS coordinates may be necessary to
share with emergency responders, or a description of how to get to
their location from the main road, entrance, building, etc. If an
employee's work site changes frequently, the emergency response plan
would need to include a clear strategy to account for their changing
locations and ensure directions to the work site are readily accessible
when needed to provide to emergency dispatchers.
Proposed paragraph (g)(1)(vi) would require the emergency response
plan to include procedures for responding to an employee experiencing
signs and symptoms of heat-related illness, including heat emergency
procedures for responding to an employee with suspected heat stroke.
Prior development of emergency response procedures can ensure
assistance and medical attention are provided efficiently and quickly.
In developing the procedures, OSHA expects that employers would look to
resources such as OSHA guidance (e.g., www.osha.gov/heat-exposure/illness-first-aid) and NIOSH recommendations (NIOSH, 2016) for more
information.
The proposed standard does not require employers to develop a plan
for each work site. However, the employer's emergency response plan(s)
must contain all the information required by paragraphs (g)(1)(i)
through (vi), some of which will vary based on work site. The employer
may be able to incorporate the information needed for different work
sites into the same emergency response plan. For instance, if an
employer has employees engaged in work activities outdoors on a farm,
as well as employees loading and unloading product from vehicles at
various locations, the employer could have one emergency response plan
with the specifications for each of these types of work sites
represented. Employers may also choose to include elements beyond those
required by paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (vi) in their plan to account
for any work activities unique to their workplace.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2) specifies the actions employers would be
required to perform if an employee is experiencing signs and symptoms
of heat-related illness. Under proposed paragraph (b) signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness means the physiological manifestations
of a heat-related illness and includes headache, nausea, weakness,
dizziness, elevated body temperature, muscle cramps, and muscle pain or
spasms.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(i) would require employers to relieve
from duty employees who are experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-
related illness. Relieving the employee from duty would allow the
employer to address the heat-related illness according to the
procedures outlined in proposed paragraphs (g)(2)(ii) through (v). This
relief from duty, including the time it takes to address the heat-
related illness according to the procedures outlined in proposed
paragraphs (g)(2)(ii) through (v), must be with pay and must continue
at least until symptoms have subsided.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(ii) would require that employers monitor
employees who are experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness, and proposed paragraph (g)(2)(iii) would require employers to
ensure that employees who are experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-
related illness are not left alone. Continuous monitoring of employees
who are experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat-related illness is
important to ensure that if the employee's condition progresses to a
heat emergency, someone is there to observe it and quickly respond.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(iv) would require employers to offer
employees who are experiencing signs and
[[Page 70795]]
symptoms of heat-related illness on-site first aid or medical services
before ending any monitoring. This requirement is intended to be
consistent with existing first aid standards (e.g. 29 CFR 1910.151,
1915.87, 1926.23 and 1926.50), which require accessibility of medical
services and first aid to varying degrees depending on the industry or
whether the workplace is near an infirmary, clinic or hospital.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(iv) would not add new requirements for staff
to be fully trained in first aid. Employers would offer the first aid
or medical resources they have available to employees on site to the
extent already required by first aid standards and follow the
procedures developed in paragraph (g)(1)(vi) as applicable.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(v) would require employers to provide
employees who are experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness with means to reduce their body temperature. Examples of means
to reduce body temperature are instructing those employees to remove
all PPE and heavy outer clothing (e.g., heavy/impermeable protective
clothing) and moving them to a cooled or shaded area (e.g., the break
areas required under paragraphs (e)(3) and (4)) where they can sit and
drink cool water. If the employer has cooling PPE (e.g., cooling
bandanas or neck wraps, and vests and cooling systems such as hybrid
personal cooling systems (HPCS), and fans) available on site, those
could also be used to cool employees as well. (For information related
to the requirement to reduce an employee's body temperature in the case
of a heat emergency, see discussion below.)
Proposed paragraph (g)(3) specifies the actions employers would
have to perform if an employee is experiencing signs and symptoms of a
heat emergency. Proposed paragraph (b) defines signs and symptoms of a
heat emergency as the physiological manifestations of a heat-related
illness that requires emergency response and includes loss of
consciousness (i.e., fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting irrationally or disoriented,
having convulsions, and (even after resting) having an elevated heart
rate.
Proposed paragraph (g)(3)(i) would require employers to take
immediate actions to reduce the employee's body temperature before
emergency medical services arrive. Rapid cooling of body temperature
during a heat emergency is essential because the potential for organ
damage and risk of death increase in a short period of time, often
before medical personnel can respond, transport, and treat the affected
individual (Belval et al., 2018). Immersion in ice water or cold water
has been reported to have the fastest cooling rates (McDermott et al.,
2009b; Casa et al., 2007). However, OSHA realizes that immersing an
employee in a tub of ice/cold water is not an option that will be
available at most work sites. Other, more practical methods of reducing
employee body temperature using materials that employers are likely to
have, or are similar to materials that an employer is likely to have,
on site have been reported to be highly effective in preventing death
from exertional heat stroke. DeGroot et al. (2023) reported survival of
362 of 363 military personnel who were suffering from exertional heat
stroke and were treated with strategically placed ``ice sheets'' (i.e.,
bed sheets soaked in ice water). McDermott et al. (2009a) reported 100%
survival in nine marathon runners who were suffering from exertional
heat stroke and treated by dousing with cold water and rubbing of ice
bags over major muscle groups. Another possible approach is the tarp-
assisted cooling oscillation (TACO) method that involves wrapping the
affected individual in a tarp with ice (Luhring et al., 2016).
Proposed paragraph (g)(3)(ii) would require employers to contact
emergency medical services immediately for employees experiencing signs
and symptoms of a heat emergency, and proposed paragraph (g)(3)(iii)
would require employers to also perform the activities described in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (iv) to aid an employee during a heat
emergency until emergency medical services arrives. Some heat-related
illnesses can quickly progress and become fatal (see Section IV.,
Health Effects). The severity and survival of heat stroke is highly
dependent on how quickly effective cooling and emergency medical
services are provided (Vicario et al., 1986; Demartini et al., 2015;
Belval et al., 2018).
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether OSHA should require a minimum duration of time an
employee who has experienced signs and symptoms of heat-related illness
must be relieved from duty, and what an appropriate duration of time
would be before returning employees to work;
Whether OSHA should add or remove any signs or symptoms in
the definitions of signs and symptoms of heat-related illness and signs
and symptoms of a heat emergency in proposed paragraph (b). If so,
provide clear and specific evidence for inclusion or exclusion;
Whether paragraph (g)(3)(i) should require specific
actions that the employer must take to reduce an employee's body
temperature before emergency medical services arrive, rather than
merely requiring unspecified ``immediate actions''. If so, describe
those specific actions; and
Whether paragraph (g)(3)(i) should prohibit certain
actions to reduce an employee's body temperature before emergency
medical services arrive. If so, indicate if there is evidence or
observations that certain actions are not helpful or are
counterproductive.
H. Paragraph (h) Training
Paragraph (h) of the proposed standard establishes requirements for
training on HRI prevention. It addresses the topics to be addressed in
training, the types of employees who are to be trained, the frequency
of training, triggers for supplemental training, and how training is to
be conducted. OSHA regularly includes training requirements in its
standards to ensure employees understand the hazards addressed by the
standard, the protections they are entitled to under the standard, and
the measures to take to protect themselves. Here, OSHA believes that it
is essential that employees are trained on heat-related hazards and how
to identify signs and symptoms of HRIs as well as on the requirements
of the proposed standard and the employer's heat-related policies and
procedures. This training ensures that employees understand heat
hazards and the workplace specific control measures that would be
implemented to address the hazard. The effectiveness of the proposed
standard would be undermined if employees did not have sufficient
knowledge and understanding to identify heat hazards and their health
effects or sufficient knowledge and understanding of their employer's
policies and procedures for addressing those hazards.
Surveys and interviews with diverse working populations highlight
the need for additional education and training on HRIs and prevention
strategies amongst employees (Luque et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2021;
Fleischer at al., 2013; Stoecklin-Marois et al., 2013; Langer et al.,
2021; Jacklitsch et al., 2018). The NACOSH Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention Work Group recommended that both workers and supervisors are
trained in heat illness and injury
[[Page 70796]]
prevention strategies. Additionally, the Work Group recommended that
the training program includes the following elements: identification of
hazards; mitigation of hazards through prevention; reporting of signs
and symptoms; and emergency response. OSHA preliminarily finds that
effective training is an essential element of any heat injury and
illness prevention program and that the requirements in proposed
paragraph (h) are necessary and appropriate to ensure the effectiveness
of the standard as a whole.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1) establishes the initial training
requirements for all exposed employees. It would require employers to
ensure that each employee receives, and understands, training on the
topics outlined in proposed paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (xvi) prior to
the employee performing any work at or above the initial heat trigger.
Requiring that initial training occur before employees perform any work
at or above the initial heat trigger ensures that the employees have
all the knowledge necessary to protect themselves prior to their
exposure to the hazard.
This provision, like paragraphs (h)(2) through (h)(4), would
require employers to ensure that employees, including supervisors and
heat safety coordinators, understand the training topics. While OSHA
does not mandate testing or specific modes of ascertaining employee
understanding of the training materials, OSHA expects that all required
training will include some measure of comprehension. Different ways
that employers could ensure comprehension of the training materials
include a knowledge check (e.g., written or oral assessment) or
discussions after the training. Post training assessments may be
particularly useful for ensuring employee participation and
comprehension when employers offer online training. Proposed paragraph
(h)(5), discussed below, includes additional requirements for
presentation of the training.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(i) would require employers to provide
training on heat stress hazards. Heat stress is the total heat load on
the body. There are three major types of hazards which contribute to
heat stress: (1) environmental factors such as high humidity, high
temperature, solar radiation, lack of air movement, and process heat
(i.e., radiant heat produced by machinery or equipment, such as ovens
and furnaces), (2) use of personal protective equipment or clothing
that can inhibit the body's ability to cool itself, and (3) the body's
metabolic heat (i.e., heat produced by the body during work involving
physical activity and exertion). Employers should make employees aware
of all the sources of heat at the workplace that contribute to heat
stress.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(ii) would require employers to provide
training on heat-related injuries and illnesses. See Section IV.,
Health Effects, for a discussion of HRIs. Examples of heat-related
illnesses include heat stroke, heat exhaustion, heat cramps, heat
syncope, and rhabdomyolysis. Heat-related injuries that could result
from heat illness include slips, trips, falls, and other injuries that
could result from the mishandling of equipment due to the effects of
heat stress.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iii) would require employers to provide
training on risk factors for heat-related injury or illness, including
the contributions of physical exertion, clothing, personal protective
equipment, a lack of acclimatization, and personal risk factors (e.g.,
age, health, alcohol consumption, and use of certain medications). As
noted above, physical exertion, clothing, and personal protective
equipment all increase an employee's heat load. More information on
acclimatization and how it affects risk is included in Section V.C.,
Risk Reduction, and more information about personal risk factors is
included in Section IV.O., Factors that Affect Risk for Heat-Related
Health Effects.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(iv) would require employers to provide
training on signs and symptoms of heat-related illness and which ones
require immediate emergency action. As defined in proposed paragraph
(b), signs and symptoms of heat-related illness means the physiological
manifestations of a heat-related illness and includes headache, nausea,
weakness, dizziness, elevated body temperature, muscle cramps, and
muscle pain or spasms. Also defined in proposed paragraph (b), signs
and symptoms of a heat emergency means the physiological manifestations
of a heat-related illness that requires emergency response and includes
loss of consciousness (i.e., fainting, collapse) with excessive body
temperature, which may or may not be accompanied by vertigo, nausea,
headache, cerebral dysfunction, or bizarre behavior. This could also
include staggering, vomiting, acting irrationally or disoriented,
having convulsions, and (even after resting) having an elevated heart
rate. Employers must train employees on how to identify these signs and
symptoms of heat-related illness in themselves and their coworkers and
when to employ the employer's emergency response procedures, as
required under proposed paragraph (g). That provision specifies the
actions that an employer must take both when an employee experiences
signs and symptoms of a heat-related illness and when an employee
experiences signs and symptoms of a heat emergency. For further
discussion see the Explanation of Proposed Requirements for Paragraph
(g).
Proposed paragraphs (h)(1)(v) through (vii) would require employers
to train employees on the importance of removing PPE that may impair
cooling during rest breaks, taking rest breaks to prevent heat-related
illness or injury, and that rest breaks are paid, and drinking water to
prevent heat-related illness or injury. Removing PPE when possible,
allows employees to cool down faster during rest breaks. As discussed
in Section V.C., Risk Reduction, drinking adequate amounts of water and
taking rest breaks are important for reducing heat strain that could
lead to HRI. Training on these topics could give the employer an
opportunity to address common misperceptions regarding heat, such as
that drinking cold water in the heat is harmful. In addition, proposed
paragraph (h)(1)(viii) and (ix) would require that employers train
employees on where break areas and employer provided water are located.
This would ensure employees are aware of the locations of break areas
and water and encourage their effective utilization.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(x) would require employers to train
employees on the importance of reporting signs and symptoms of heat-
related illnesses that they experience personally or those they observe
in co-workers. Training employees to be observant of and to report
early any signs and symptoms of heat-related illnesses they see at the
workplace is a key factor to identifying and addressing potential heat-
related incidents before they result in a serious illness or injury. In
addition, employers should ensure that employees are familiar with the
employer's own procedures for reporting signs and symptoms of a heat
emergency or heat-related illness pursuant to its heat emergency
response plan as required in proposed paragraph (g).
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xi) would require employers to train
employees on all the policies and procedures applicable to the
employee's duties, as indicated in the work site's HIIPP. Employees
play an important role in effective implementation of the employer's
work site-specific policies and procedures to prevent heat-related
illnesses and injury, and training on these policies and procedures is
[[Page 70797]]
necessary to ensure that they are implemented effectively. OSHA
recognizes that employees perform various duties and therefore likely
need different types of training, and the proposed requirement allows
employers flexibility to account for these differences in their
training programs. Thus, certain components of the training may need to
be tailored to an employee's assigned duties. For example, while all
employees would require training on recognizing signs and symptoms of
heat-related illness, employees observing a co-worker as part of buddy
system under proposed paragraph (f)(3)(i) may require additional
training on how to report signs and symptoms according to the policies
and procedures established and implemented by the employer. In another
example, the individual designated by the employer to ensure that
emergency procedures are invoked when appropriate under proposed
paragraph (g)(1)(iii) might require more detailed training on the
employer's heat emergency response procedures. Another example could be
training employees who wear vapor-impermeable clothing on the policies
and procedures the employer has implemented to protect them under
proposed paragraph (c)(3).
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xii) would require employers to train
employees on the identity of the heat safety coordinator. Under
proposed paragraph (c)(5), the heat safety coordinator would be
designated to implement and monitor the HIIPP and would be given
authority to ensure compliance with the HIIPP. Therefore, employees
could contact the heat safety coordinator to ask questions about the
HIIPP, to provide feedback on the policies and procedures, or report
possible deficiencies with implementation of the HIIPP. Employers
should encourage employees to contact the heat safety coordinator for
these reasons. To ensure that employees are able to contact the heat
safety coordinator, employers could provide the name of the individual
and other information needed to contact them as part of the training
required under this paragraph.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xiii) would require employers to train
employees on the requirements of this standard. While proposed
paragraph (h)(1)(xi) would require training on all policies and
procedures applicable to an employee's duties as noted in the
employer's HIIPP, training under (h)(1)(xiii) would ensure that
employees are familiar with all requirements of this proposed standard.
For example, employees would have to be informed of the requirements
related to employee participation, including in the development,
implementation, review and update of the HIIPP under proposed paragraph
(c), and identifying work areas with reasonable expectations of
exposures at or above the initial heat trigger, and in developing and
updating the monitoring plan under proposed paragraph (d). Employees
would also need to be informed that requirements of the proposed
standard would be implemented at no cost to employees under proposed
paragraph (j). The proposed provision would also ensure that employees
are made familiar with the employer's heat-related policies and
procedures.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xiv) would require employers to train
employees on how to access the work site's HIIPP. If relevant this
would include training on how to access both digital or physical
copies.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xv) would require employers to train
employees on their right to protections under this standard (e.g., rest
breaks, water), and that employers are prohibited from discharging or
in any manner discriminating against any employee for exercising those
rights. Employees' right to be free from retaliation for availing
themselves of the protections of the standard or for raising safety
concerns comes from section 11(c) of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. 660(c), and
requiring employers to train on these protections is consistent with
the purpose of that provision. Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xv) is also
consistent with section 8(c)(1) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 657(c)(1), which
directs the Secretary to issue regulations requiring employers to keep
their employees informed of their protections under the Act and any
applicable standards, through posting of notices or ``other appropriate
means.'' This training ensures that employees know that they have a
right to the protections required by the standard. Having employers
acknowledge and train their employees about their rights under this
standard provides assurance that employees are aware of the protections
afforded them and encourages them to exercise their rights without fear
of reprisal. They may otherwise fear retaliation for utilizing the
protections afforded them under the standard or for speaking up about
workplace heat hazard concerns. This fear would undermine the
effectiveness of the standard because employee participation plays a
central role in effectuating the standard's purpose.
Proposed paragraph (h)(1)(xvi) would require that if the employer
is required under paragraph (f)(5) to place warning signs for
excessively high heat areas, they would be required to train employees
on procedures to follow when working in these areas. These procedures
could include, but are not limited to, any PPE that might be required
when working in those areas, if relevant, and reminders to remove PPE
when taking rest breaks in break areas and should reinforce employees'
access to rest breaks in break areas, required under paragraph (f)(2),
and drinking water, required under paragraph (e)(2), as appropriate.
Proposed paragraph (h)(2) would require the employer to ensure that
each supervisor responsible for supervising employees performing any
work at or above the initial heat trigger and each heat safety
coordinator receives training on, and understands, both the topics
outlined in paragraph (h)(1) and the topics outlined in paragraphs
(h)(2)(i) and (ii). Proposed paragraph (h)(2)(i) would require the
employer to train supervisors and heat safety coordinators on the
policies and procedures developed to comply with the applicable
requirements of this standard, including the policies and procedures
for monitoring heat conditions developed to comply with paragraphs
(d)(1) and (d)(3)(ii). Proposed paragraph (h)(2)(ii) would require the
employer to train supervisors and heat safety coordinators on
procedures they would have to follow if an employee exhibits signs and
symptoms of heat related illness, which an employer is required to
develop for its HIIPP pursuant to proposed paragraph (g)(1)(vi). This
would ensure effective and rapid treatment and care for employees
experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related illness. OSHA included
these proposed provisions to ensure that supervisors and heat safety
coordinators receive additional training needed to perform their duties
as specified in the proposed standard.
Proposed paragraph (h)(3) would require the employer to ensure that
each employee receives annual refresher training on, and understands,
the subjects addressed in paragraph (h)(1) of the proposed standard.
This paragraph would also require that each supervisor and heat safety
coordinator additionally receive annual refresher training on, and
understands, the topics addressed in paragraph (h)(2). OSHA
preliminarily finds that annual training is needed to refresh and
reinforce an employee's recollection and knowledge about the topics
addressed in this paragraph. This proposed provision also indicates
that for employees who perform work outdoors, the employer must conduct
the annual refresher training before or at the start of the heat
season. This can
[[Page 70798]]
vary depending on the weather conditions in the geographic region where
the employer is located. Accordingly, OSHA intends this requirement to
be flexible and to allow employers leeway to determine the start of the
heat season, so long as those determinations are reasonable. For
example, in northern States such as Michigan, employers might find it
best to do annual training before the time when temperatures commonly
reach the initial heat trigger or above. In those cases, temperatures
are likely to be below the initial heat trigger for a substantial
portion of the year and employees are likely to need reminders of all
policies and procedures related to heat, both for the initial and high
heat triggers. Employers can determine when heat season is for them
based on normal weather patterns and would be required to conduct
training prior to or at the start of the heat season. In most
instances, OSHA expects that employers would do this no sooner than 30
days before the start of their heat season, so that employees can
recall training materials easily, rather than for example, 6-months
before the start of heat season. For new employees at outdoor work
sites, this may result in some employees receiving the annual refresher
training less than a year after the initial training.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4) specifies when supplemental training
would be required. Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(i) would require the
employer to ensure that employees promptly receive and understand
additional training whenever changes occur that affect the employee's
exposure to heat at work (e.g., new job tasks, relocation to a
different facility or area of a facility). For example, if an employee
is assigned to a new task or workstation that exposes them to high
process heat or to outdoor work where the employee is exposed to
hazardous heat, and such employee was not previously trained on the
necessary topics required under this paragraph, then the employer would
have to provide that employee with the requisite training. Similarly,
if an employee is assigned to a new work area to which different heat-
related policies and procedures apply, they would need to be trained on
these area-specific policies and procedures. Additional examples could
include when an employer's work site experiences heat waves, when new
heat sources are added to the workplace, or when employees are assigned
to a new task where they need to wear vapor-impermeable PPE (i.e., non-
breathable). In these instances, the training required under this
provision would have to comport with the requirements of the rest of
this paragraph.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(ii) would require that each employee
promptly receives, and understands, additional training whenever
changes occur in policies and procedures addressed in paragraph
(h)(1)(xi) of this proposed standard. Proposed paragraph (c) would
require employers to monitor their HIIPP to ensure ongoing
effectiveness. When doing so, the employer may find that the policies
and procedures are inadequate to protect employees from heat hazards.
If so, the employer would have to update those policies and procedures.
When this happens, employers would be required to train all employees
on the new or altered policies and procedures so that the employees are
aware of the new policies and procedures and how to follow them to
reduce their risk of developing heat-related illnesses and injuries.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iii) would require that each employee
promptly receives, and understands, additional training whenever there
is an indication that an employee(s) has not retained the necessary
understanding. Examples of this would include employees who appear to
have forgotten signs and symptoms of heat-related illnesses or how to
respond when an employee is experiencing those signs and symptoms. It
is essential that employees remain familiar with training they have
received so they continue to have the knowledge and skills needed to
protect themselves and possibly co-workers from heat hazards.
Supplemental training under paragraph (h)(4)(iii) must be provided to
those employees who have demonstrated a lack of understanding or
failure to follow the employer's heat policies and procedures or comply
with the requirements of this proposed standard.
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iv) would require that each employee
promptly receives, and understands, additional training whenever a
heat-related injury or illness occurs at the work site that results in
death, days away from work, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss
of consciousness. Occurrences of these types of heat-related injuries
and illnesses could indicate that one or more employees are not
following policies and procedures for preventing or responding to heat-
related illnesses and injuries. After a heat-related illness or injury
in the workplace occurs that meets the requirements of proposed
paragraph (h)(4)(iv), OSHA expects that each employee would receive
supplemental training. This training could be a ``lessons learned'' or
``alert'' type training.
Both initial and supplemental training are important components of
an effective heat injury and illness prevention program. Initial
training provides employees with the knowledge and skills they need to
protect themselves against heat hazards, and also emphasizes the
importance of following workplace policies and procedures in the HIIPP.
Supplemental training ensures employees continue to have the knowledge
and skills they need to protect themselves from heat hazards. It
provides an opportunity to present new information that was not
available during the initial training or that becomes relevant when an
employee's duties change. Additionally, supplemental training is
necessary when an employee demonstrates that they have not retained
information from the initial training (e.g., by failing to follow
appropriate policies and procedures). Supplemental training does not
necessarily need to include all information covered in the initial
training, as only some policies or procedures may need to be reviewed,
and employees will receive a full refresher training annually.
Proposed paragraph (h)(5) would require that all training provided
under paragraphs (h)(1) through (4) is provided in a language and at a
literacy level each employee, supervisor, and heat safety coordinator
understands. In addition, the provision would require that the employer
provide employees with an opportunity for questions and answers about
the training materials. For the training to be effective, the employer
must ensure that it is provided in a manner that the employee is able
to understand. Employees have varying educational levels, literacy, and
language skills, and the training must be presented in a language, or
languages, and at a level of understanding that accounts for these
differences. This may mean, for example, providing materials,
instruction, or assistance in Spanish rather than English if the
employees being trained are Spanish-speaking and do not understand
English. The employer is not required to provide training in the
employee's preferred language if the employee understands both
languages; as long as the employee is able to understand the material
in the language used, the intent of the proposed standard would be met.
As explained above with respect to paragraph (h)(1), OSHA does not
mandate testing or specific modes of ascertaining employee
understanding of the training materials, but expects that
[[Page 70799]]
all required training will include some measure of comprehension.
The proposed provision does not specify the manner in which
training would be delivered. Employers may conduct training in various
ways, such as in-person (e.g., classroom instruction or informal
discussions during safety meetings/toolbox talks), virtually (e.g.,
videoconference, recorded video, online training), using written
materials, or any combination of those methods. However, this paragraph
would require the employer to provide an opportunity for employees to
ask questions regardless of the medium of training. It is critical that
trainees have the opportunity to ask questions and receive answers if
they do not fully understand the material that is presented to them. If
it is not possible to have someone present or available during the
training, employers could provide the contact information of the
individual that employees can contact to answer their questions (e.g.,
an email or telephone contact). OSHA expects employers to make an
effort to respond to questions promptly.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether the agency should require other training topics in
the standard;
Whether the inclusion of separate training requirements
for supervisors and heat safety coordinators is appropriate, or whether
the duty-specific training requirements in proposed paragraph (h)(1)
are sufficient;
Whether the agency has identified appropriate triggers for
supplemental training;
Whether the agency should require annual refresher
training or whether the more performance-based supplemental training
requirements are sufficient; and
Whether the agency should specify certain criteria that
define the start of heat season.
I. Paragraph (i) Recordkeeping
Paragraph (i) of the proposed standard would require certain
employers to create written or electronic records of on-site
temperature measurements and establishes the duration of time that
employers must retain those records. Specifically, it applies to
employers that have indoor work areas where there is a reasonable
expectation that employees are or may be exposed to heat at or above
the initial heat trigger, and that are therefore required to conduct
on-site temperature measurements under paragraph (d)(3)(ii). These
employers must have and maintain written or electronic records of these
measurements. Under paragraph (i), employers must retain these records
for a minimum of six months.
Maintaining these records, whether written or electronic, serves
several purposes. It will assist OSHA in determining conditions at the
work site, which will facilitate OSHA's ability to verify employers'
compliance with the standard's provisions. Additionally, these records
may facilitate employers identifying trends in indoor temperatures and
their effect on employee health and safety. In the event of a heat-
related injury or illness, these records can help employers assess the
conditions at the time of the injury or illness in order to prevent
such an event from recurring.
Paragraph (i) applies to indoor work areas only. This is because
employers cannot accurately rely on weather forecasting to predict and
monitor temperatures in these areas like they can for outdoor work
areas. It is therefore not possible for OSHA or the employer to
recreate historic temperature records for indoor work areas in the
absence of on-site temperature measurement records. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that six months is an appropriate timeframe
for records retention because this is the maximum time permitted for an
OSHA investigation (see 29 U.S.C. 658(c)). There are several
commercially available heat monitoring devices that are capable of
maintaining electronic logs of recorded measurements for six months
(ERG, 2024b). Therefore, employers can comply with the recordkeeping
requirement by using monitoring devices with sufficient storage
capability. Alternatively, employers could comply by creating and
maintaining written records based on monitoring devices that do not
have digital recording capabilities.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and evidence regarding the following:
Whether six months is an appropriate and feasible duration
of time to maintain records of monitoring data;
Whether permitting employers to maintain records on
devices that store data locally is appropriate; and
Whether the standard should require retention of any other
records, and if so, for what duration.
J. Paragraph (j) Requirements Implemented at no Cost to Employees
Proposed paragraph (j) provides that implementation of all
requirements of the standard must be at no cost to employees, including
paying employees their normal rate of pay when compliance requires
employee time. This provision is included to make it clear that the
employer is responsible for all costs associated with implementing the
standard, including not only direct monetary expenses to the employee,
but also reasonable time to perform required tasks and training.
This proposed requirement is consistent with the OSH Act, which
requires employers to ensure a safe and healthful workplace. The OSH
Act reflects Congress's determination that the costs of compliance with
the Act and OSHA standards are part of the cost of doing business and
OSHA may foreclose employers from shifting those costs to employees
(see Am. Textile Mfrs. Inst., Inc. v. Donovan, 452 U.S. 490, 514
(1981); Phelps Dodge Corp. v. OSHRC, 725 F.2d 1237, 1239-40 (9th Cir.
1984); see also Sec'y of Labor v. Beverly Healthcare-Hillview, 541 F.3d
193, 198-201 (3d Cir. 2008)). The proposed requirement is also
consistent with OSHA's longstanding practice in prior rulemakings. See,
e.g., Employer Payment for Personal Protective Equipment; 72 FR 64342,
64344 (Nov. 15, 2007); Occupational Exposure to Bloodborne Pathogens,
56 FR 64004, 64125 (Dec. 1991). The intent of proposed paragraph (j) is
that the standard be implemented at no cost to employees because
employer payment for items, such as access to water and shade, is
necessary to ensure employees are provided safe working conditions and
are protected from the hazard of heat stress. Employees are more likely
to take advantage of various workplace protections if such protections
are provided at no cost to them. Moreover, as explained in Section
VIII., Distributional Analysis, workers from underserved populations
are disproportionately exposed to occupational heat hazards. For all
workers, but particularly more vulnerable workers, protection from
occupational hazards must not depend on workers' ability to pay for
those protections. In indicating that the implementation of all
requirements of this standard must be at no cost to the employee, OSHA
considers costs to include not only direct monetary expenses to the
employee, but also the time and other expenses necessary to perform
required tasks.
The following discussion highlights specific proposed requirements
in paragraphs (c) Heat injury and illness prevention plan, (d)
Identifying heat hazards, (e) Requirements at or above the initial heat
trigger, (f) Requirements at or above the high heat trigger, (g) Heat
illness and emergency response
[[Page 70800]]
and planning, and (h) Training. This discussion is illustrative of the
requirement that employees are not to bear the costs of implementing
the standard. However, the requirement in proposed paragraph (j)
applies to all provisions of the proposed standard, including employee
time spent to implement or comply with those provisions.
Proposed paragraphs (c)(6) and (7) would require employers to seek
the input and involvement of non-managerial employees and their
representatives, if any, in the development and implementation of the
heat injury and illness prevention plan (HIIPP) and during any reviews
or updates of the HIIPP. Similarly, proposed paragraph (d)(3)(iv) would
require the employer to seek the input and involvement of non-
managerial employees and their representatives, if any, when evaluating
the work site to identify work areas with a reasonable expectation of
exposures at or above the initial heat trigger and in developing and
updating monitoring plans. Under these paragraphs, the employer would
be required to cover the expenses of non-managerial employees such as
any travel costs that may be necessary, and to pay employees their
normal rate of pay for the time necessary to engage in the development,
implementation, and the required reviews and updates of the employer's
HIIPP and monitoring plan.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2) would require the employer to provide
access to potable water for drinking that is placed in locations
readily accessible to the employee, suitably cool, and of sufficient
quantity to provide access to 1 quart of drinking water per employee
per hour. To ensure this is provided at no cost to employees, the
employer would not only need to pay for the water, its container, and
the means to utilize the water (cups, bottles, etc.) but would be
required to pay employees their normal rate of pay for time necessary
to consume water and any time that may be necessary to travel to and
from the location where water is provided. For example, if an employee
works in an area where water cannot be made available due to safety
considerations (e.g., certain areas in foundries) or because of the
presence of toxic materials, and must walk to a water fountain in a
break room to obtain water, the employer would be required to pay the
employee for the time required to walk to the water fountain, consume
water, and return to the work area.
Proposed paragraph (e)(7) would require employers to implement an
acclimatization protocol for new and returning employees when they
would be exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger except
when the employer can demonstrate the employee consistently worked
under the same or similar conditions as the employer's working
conditions within the prior 14 days. An acclimatization protocol sets
forth the process whereby employees gradually adapt to work in the
heat. Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(i) specifies the acclimatization
protocol for new employees exposed to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger during their first week on the job. The employer would have a
choice to either: (A) implement an acclimatization plan that, at
minimum, would include the measures in proposed paragraph (f) (i.e.,
rest breaks, observation for signs and symptoms of heat-related
illness, a hazard alert, and warning signs at excessively high heat
areas); or (B) provide for gradual acclimatization to heat in which
employee exposure to heat is restricted to no more than 20% of a normal
work shift exposure duration on the first day of work, 40% on the
second day of work, 60% of the third day of work, and 80% on the fourth
day of work. Proposed paragraph (e)(7)(ii) specifies the
acclimatization protocol for returning employees (i.e., employees who
have been away (e.g., on vacation or sick leave) for more than 14 days)
exposed to heat at or above the initial heat trigger during their first
week back on the job. The employer would have a choice to either: (A)
implement an acclimatization plan that, at minimum, would incorporate
the measures in proposed paragraph (f) whenever the heat index is at or
above the initial heat trigger during the employee's first week upon
returning to work; or (B) provide for gradual acclimatization to heat
in which employee exposure to heat is restricted to no more than 50% of
a normal work shift exposure during the first day of work, 60% on the
second day of work, and 80% on the third day of work.
An employer who chooses to provide a plan for gradual
acclimatization to heat in which employee exposure to heat is
restricted would be required to compensate the employee for the hours
they would typically be expected to work, i.e., the employee's normal
full shift, after acclimatization. For example, if a new employee would
be expected to work 8 hours on a normal shift after acclimatization and
the new employee would be restricted to 50% exposure during the normal
work shift or 4 hours on the first day, the employer would be required
to compensate the employee at their normal rate of pay for the full 8
hours even if the employee worked for only 4 hours.
OSHA anticipates that many employers would provide employees with
other work (e.g., work activities performed in indoor work areas or
vehicles where air-conditioning consistently keeps the ambient
temperature below 80 [deg]F, sedentary work activities at indoor work
sites) during the acclimatization period when they are restricted from
duties that involve exposure to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger. Employees would still be able to work a full 8-hour shift as
long as their duration of exposure to heat at or above the initial heat
trigger is limited to the specified duration.
Proposed paragraphs (e)(8) and (f)(2) would require that employees
be paid during the rest breaks required by those provisions. OSHA finds
it important that employees be paid during the breaks to which they are
entitled under the standard so that employees are not financially
penalized and thus discouraged from taking advantage of those
protections. For employees compensated on an hourly basis, this means
employees would need to receive the same hourly rate of pay during rest
breaks required by paragraphs (e)(8) and (f)(2) as they would receive
while working.
Some employees are paid on a piece-rate basis, meaning they are
compensated based on factors such as jobs completed, quantity of
produce picked, or products produced. Examples of employees compensated
on a piece-rate basis include agricultural employees paid by the pound
of produce picked, mechanics paid for each type of job completed (e.g.,
oil change or tune-up), warehouse employees paid by the number and size
of orders filled, manufacturing employees paid by the number of
products manufactured, or construction employees paid by the size and
type of job completed. Employees paid on a piece-rate basis may be
especially reluctant to take breaks. In a study by Wadsworth et al.,
2019, focus group discussions with piece-rate farm employees revealed
that many expressed concerns about possible losses in earnings and that
they might be replaced by another employee if they took breaks, and
many such employees brought their own water to work to reduce the time
they are not picking produce.
To ensure piece rate employees are not discouraged from taking rest
breaks, the proposed standard would require employers to compensate
them at their normal rate of pay for time necessary for rest breaks. In
the context of piece rate
[[Page 70801]]
employees and for purposes of this proposed standard, OSHA intends the
phrase ``normal rate of pay'' to mean the rate that results from the
following approach, which has also been adopted by the State of
California (Cal. Lab. Code section 226.2 (eff. Jan 1, 2021)): employers
would determine the normal rate of pay for piece-rate employees by
dividing the total weekly pay by the total hours worked during the work
week, not including heat-related rest breaks. That value would be
multiplied by the total time of heat-related rest breaks to determine
how much employees need to be paid for those breaks. For example, if a
piece-rate employee works a 5-day work week, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. with a
30-minute unpaid lunch break from 12-12:30 each day, and earns $600 in
piece rate pay for the week, and under proposed paragraph (f)(2) the
employer would be obligated to provide two 15-minute heat-related rest
breaks per day (i.e., the employee is exposed at or above the high heat
trigger from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day), that employee would receive
a normal rate of pay of $16/hour for heat-related rest breaks based on
the following formula:
Formula for Heat-Related Rest Break Compensation of Piece-rate
Employees
Total heat-related rest break time/week = 0.5 hours/day x 5 days/
week = 2.5 hours/week
Hours worked, excluding non-meal heat-related breaks = 40 hours-2.5
hours = 37.5 hours
Heat-related rest break compensation per hour = $600 / 37.5 hours =
$16/hour
For an employee who also took rest breaks needed to prevent
overheating under proposed paragraph (e)(8), the time of those rest
break(s) would be added to the total heat-related rest break time per
week to calculate the employee's normal rate of pay. OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this approach accurately represents the
normal rate of pay for piece-rate workers and thereby ensures that
these workers would not lose pay when taking advantage of the
standard's protection.
Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(i) would require that an employee
experiencing signs and symptoms of heat-related illness must be
relieved from duty. The proposed standard would require the employer to
pay employees their normal pay while they are relieved from duty until
the signs and symptoms subside.
Proposed paragraph (h) would establish requirements for training on
heat hazards and associated protective measures. All training provided
by the employer to meet the requirements of the standard would be
required to be provided at no cost to the employee. The employer would
be required to pay employees for time spent in training, including any
time needed to travel to and from training.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA requests comments and information on the following:
Whether OSHA should consider an alternative approach to
calculating normal rate of pay for piece-rate employees, and what those
alternative approaches are;
Whether OSHA should make the calculation for piece rate
workers' normal rate of pay explicit in paragraph (j); and
Whether proposed paragraph (j) mandating that requirements
be implemented at no cost to employees is adequate, or whether there
are other potential costs to employees that OSHA should take into
consideration.
K. Paragraph (k) Dates
Paragraph (k) of the proposed standard would establish the
effective date for the final standard and the date for compliance with
the requirements specified in the standard. In paragraph (k)(1), OSHA
proposes an effective date 60 days after the date of publication of the
final standard in the Federal Register. This period is intended to
allow affected employers the opportunity to familiarize themselves with
the standard.
Paragraph (k)(2) of the proposed standard would require employers
to comply with all requirements of the standard 90 days after the
effective date (150 days after the date of publication of the final
standard in the Federal Register). The proposed compliance date is
intended to allow adequate time for employers to undertake the
necessary planning and preparation steps to comply with the standard.
OSHA has preliminarily concluded that 90 days is sufficient time for
employers to develop a heat injury and illness prevention plan (HIIPP),
identify heat hazards in their workplace(s), implement the protective
measures required under the standard, and provide required training to
employees.
A. Requests for Comments
OSHA solicits comment on the adequacy of the proposed effective and
compliance dates. OSHA aims to ensure that protective measures are
implemented as quickly as possible, while also ensuring that employers
have sufficient time to implement these measures. In addition, the
agency is interested in whether there are any circumstances that would
warrant an alternative timeframe for compliance, including a shorter
timeframe, and seeks comment on approaches that would phase in
requirements of the standard.
L. Paragraph (l) Severability
The severability provision, paragraph (l) of the proposed standard,
serves two purposes. First, it expresses OSHA's intent that the general
presumption of severability should be applied to this standard; i.e.,
if any section or provision of the proposed standard is held invalid or
unenforceable or is stayed or enjoined by any court of competent
jurisdiction, the remaining sections or provisions should remain
effective and operative. Second, the severability provision also serves
to express OSHA's judgment, based on its technical expertise, that each
individual section and provision of the proposed standard remains
workable in the event that one or more sections or provisions are
invalidated, stayed, or enjoined; thus, the severance of any
provisions, sections, or applications of the standard will not render
the standard ineffective or unlawful as a whole. Consequently, the
remainder of the standard should be allowed to take effect.
With respect to this rulemaking, it is OSHA's intent that all
provisions and sections be considered severable. In this regard, the
agency intends that: (1) in the event that any provision within a
section of the standard is stayed, enjoined, or invalidated, all
remaining provisions within remain workable and shall remain effective
and operative; (2) in the event that any whole section of the standard
is stayed, enjoined, or invalidated, all remaining sections remain
workable and shall remain effective and operative; and (3) in the event
that any application of a provision is stayed, enjoined, or
invalidated, the provision shall be construed so as to continue to give
the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law.
Although OSHA always intends for a presumption of severability to
be applied to its standards, the agency has opted to include an
explicit severability clause in this standard to remove any potential
for doubt as to its intent. OSHA believes that this clarity is useful
because of the multilayered programmatic approach to risk reduction it
proposes here. The agency has preliminarily determined that the suite
of programmatic requirements described in Section VII., Explanation of
Proposed Requirements, is reasonably necessary and appropriate to
protect employees from the significant risks posed by exposure to heat
in the
[[Page 70802]]
workplace. While OSHA preliminarily finds that these requirements
substantially reduce the risk of occupational injury and illness from
exposure to heat when implemented together, the agency also believes
that each individual requirement will independently reduce this risk to
some extent, and that each requirement added to the first will result
in a progressively greater reduction of risk. For example, should a
reviewing court find the requirement of paragraph (f)(2), requiring 15
minute rest breaks every two hours in high heat conditions invalid for
some reason, the remainder of controls required by the standard in
those conditions would still provide necessary protections to
employees, and OSHA would intend that the rest of the standard should
stand. Therefore, OSHA intends to have as many of the protective
measures in this standard implemented as possible to reduce employees'
risk of occupational injury, illness, and death from exposure to heat.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that any provision
or section of this standard is invalid on its face or as applied, the
court should presume that OSHA would have issued the remainder of the
standard without the invalidated provision(s) or application(s).
Similarly, should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that any
provision, section, or application of this standard is required to be
stayed or enjoined, the court should presume that OSHA intends for the
remainder of the standard to take effect. See, e.g., Am. Dental Ass'n
v. Martin, 984 F.2d 823, 830-31 (7th Cir. 1993) (affirming and allowing
most of OSHA's bloodborne pathogens standard to take effect while
vacating application of the standard to certain employers).
VIII. Preliminary Economic Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
OSHA has examined the impacts of this rulemaking as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September
30,1993), Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review (January 18, 2011), Executive Order 14094 entitled ``Modernizing
Regulatory Review'' (April 6, 2023), the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96354), section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104-4), and
Executive Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).\5\ The
Executive Order 14094 entitled ``Modernizing Regulatory Review''
(hereinafter, the Modernizing E.O.) amends section 3(f)(1) of Executive
Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review). The amended section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as
an action that is likely to result in a rule: (1) having an annual
effect on the economy of $200 million or more in any 1 year (adjusted
every 3 years by the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic product), or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or Tribal governments
or communities; (2) creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raise legal or policy issues for which centralized
review would meaningfully further the President's priorities or the
principles set forth in this Executive Order, as specifically
authorized in a timely manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each
case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ While OSHA presents the following analysis under the
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, the agency
ultimately cannot simply maximize net benefits due to the overriding
legal requirements in the OSH Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for regulatory
actions that are significant per section 3(f)(1) ($200 million or more
in any 1 year). OMB's OIRA has determined this rulemaking is
significant per section 3(f)(1) as measured by the $200 million or more
in any 1 year. Accordingly, OSHA has prepared this Preliminary Economic
Analysis (PEA) \6\ that to the best of the agency's ability presents
the costs and benefits of the rulemaking. OIRA has reviewed this
proposed standard, and the agency has provided the following assessment
of its impact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ OSHA historically has referred to their regulatory impact
analyses (RIAs) as Economic Analyses in part because performing an
analysis of economic feasibility is a core legal function of their
purpose. But a PEA (or Final Economic Analysis) should be understood
as including an RIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Market Failure and Need for Regulation
I. Introduction
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (September 30, 1993)) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821 (January 18, 2011)) direct regulatory
agencies to assess whether, from a legal or an economic view, a Federal
regulation is needed to the extent it is not ``required by law.''
Executive Order 12866 states: ``Federal agencies should promulgate only
such regulations as are required by law, are necessary to interpret the
law, or are made necessary by compelling public need, such as material
failures of private markets to protect or improve the health and safety
of the public, the environment, or the well-being of the American
people.'' This Executive Order further requires that each agency
``identify the problem that it intends to address (including, where
applicable, the failures of private markets or public institutions that
warrant new agency action)'' and instructs agencies to ``identify and
assess available alternatives to direct regulation.'' (58 FR 51735
(September 30, 1993)). This section addresses those issues of market
failure and alternatives to regulation as directed by the Executive
Order.
OSHA is proposing a new standard for Heat Injury and Illness
Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings (29 CFR 1910.148)
because the agency has preliminarily determined, based on the evidence
in the record, that there is a compelling public need for a
comprehensive standard addressing employees' occupational exposure to
hazardous heat. OSHA presents the legal requirements governing this
standard and its preliminary findings and conclusions supporting the
proposed standard in Section II., Pertinent Legal Authority, and
throughout other sections of the preamble.
As detailed in Section VIII.B., Profile of Affected Industries,
OSHA has preliminarily determined that millions of employees are
exposed to occupational heat hazards that place them at a significant
risk of serious injury, illness, and death. Employees exposed to heat
suffer higher rates of non-fatal heat-related injuries and illnesses
(HRIs) and heat-related fatalities, including heat stroke, heat
exhaustion, heat syncope, rhabdomyolysis, heat cramps, hyponatremia,
heat edema, and heat rash; and heat-related injuries, including falls,
collisions, and other workplace accidents (see Section IV., Health
Effects for additional information). OSHA estimates that the
[[Page 70803]]
proposed standard would prevent 531 heat-related fatalities (of the
estimated 559 annual fatalities) and 16,027 HRIs per year (of the
estimated 24,656 annual HRIs).
These estimates have potential limitations. The parameters used to
estimate the magnitude of underreporting of HRIs and the effectiveness
of the proposed standard have considerable uncertainty. Furthermore,
these estimates do not account for other expected benefits from the
rule (e.g., reduction in indirect traumatic injuries due to heat and
reduction in worker disutility). For additional discussion see Sections
VIII.E.IV., Additional Unquantified Potential Benefits and VIII.E.V.,
Uncertainty in Benefits.
OSHA has also preliminarily determined that the standard is
technologically and economically feasible (see Section IX.,
Technological Feasibility and Section VIII.D., Economic Feasibility).
The agency not only finds that this proposed standard is necessary and
appropriate to ensure the safety and health of employees exposed to
heat, as required by the OSH Act, but also demonstrates, in this
section, that this standard corrects a market failure in which labor
markets fail to adequately protect employee health and safety.
Even a perfectly functioning market maximizes efficient allocation
of goods and services at the expense of other important social values
to which the market (as reflected in the collective actions of its
participants) is indifferent or undervalues. In such cases, government
intervention might be justified to address a compelling public need.
The history and enactment of the OSH Act indicate a Congressional view
that American markets undervalued occupational safety and health when
it set forth the Act's protective purposes and authorized the Secretary
of Labor to promulgate occupational safety and health standards.
As discussed in this section, OSHA concludes there is a
demonstrable failure of labor markets to protect employees from
exposure to significant, unnecessary risks from heat exposure. The
agency recognizes that many firms and governments have responded to the
risks from heat exposure by implementing control programs for their
employees. Information that OSHA has collected suggests that many
employees with occupational exposure to hazardous heat currently
receive some level of protection against heat hazards and some existing
control programs may be as protective as the proposed standard.
Nevertheless, the effectiveness of labor markets in providing the level
of employee health and safety required by the OSH Act is not universal,
as many other employers in the same sectors fail to provide their
employees with adequate protection against heat hazards. This is
evidenced by the documented injuries, illnesses, and deaths discussed
throughout this preamble. Accordingly, the existence of adequate
protections in some workplaces speaks to the feasibility of the
standard, not necessarily to the lack of need.
In this case, OSHA has preliminarily determined that protections
are needed to ensure the safety and health of employees exposed to
heat. This section is devoted to showing that markets fail with respect
to optimal risk for occupational exposure to heat hazards. Other
sections of this preamble address whether, given that markets fail, a
new regulation is needed.
The discussion below considers why labor markets, as well as
information dissemination programs, workers' compensation systems, and
tort liability options, each may fail to protect employees from heat
hazards, resulting in the need for a more protective OSHA standard.
II. Labor Market Imperfections
Under suitable conditions, a market system is economically
efficient in the following sense: resources are allocated where they
are most highly valued; the appropriate mix of goods and services,
embodying the desired bundle of characteristics, is produced; and
further improvements in the welfare of any member of society cannot be
attained without making at least one other member worse off.
Economic theory, supported by empirical data, posits that, in the
labor market, employers and their potential employees bargain over the
conditions of employment, including not only salary and other employee
benefits, but also occupational risks to employee safety and health.
Employers compete among themselves to attract employees. In order to
induce potential employees to accept hazardous jobs, employers must
offer a higher salary--termed a ``wage premium for risk'' or ``risk
premium'' for short--to compensate for the additional job risk.\7\
Because employers must pay higher wages for more hazardous work, they
have an incentive to make the workplace safer by making safety-related
investments in equipment and training or by using more costly but safer
work practices. According to economic theory, the operation of the
labor market will provide the optimal level of occupational risk when
each employer's additional cost for job safety just equals the avoided
payout in risk premiums to employees (Lavetti, 2023). The theory
assumes that each employer is indifferent to whether it pays the higher
wage or pays for a safer or more healthful workplace but will opt for
whichever costs less or improves productivity more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The concept of compensating wage differentials for
undesirable job characteristics, including occupational hazards,
goes back to Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, which was
originally published in 1776. More recent empirical investigation
has tended to validate the core theory, with the acknowledgement of
labor market imperfections, as otherwise noted in this section
(e.g., Lavetti, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the labor market to function in a way that leads to optimal
levels of occupational risk, three conditions must be satisfied. First,
potential employees and employers must have the same, perfect
information--that is, they must be fully informed about their workplace
options, including job hazards, or be able to acquire such information.
Second, participants in the labor market must directly bear all the
costs and obtain all the benefits of their actions. In other words,
none of the direct impacts of labor market transactions can be
externalized to outside parties. Third, the relevant labor markets must
be perfectly competitive, which requires a large number of employers, a
large number of employees, and other conditions such that no individual
economic agent is able to influence the risk-adjusted wage, and such
that the risk-adjusted wage, net of other amenities, is equal to the
marginal revenue associated with their output (Card, 2022).
The discussion below examines (1) imperfect information, (2)
externalities, and (3) imperfect competition in the labor market in
more detail, with particular emphasis on employee exposure to heat
hazards, as appropriate.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The section on workers' compensation insurance later in this
section identifies and discusses other related market imperfections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Imperfect Information
As described below, imperfect information about job hazards is
present at several levels that reinforce each other: employers
frequently lack knowledge about workplace hazards and how to reduce
them; employees are often unaware of the workplace risks to which they
are exposed; and employees typically have difficulty in understanding
the risk information they are able to obtain. Imperfect information at
these various levels has likely
[[Page 70804]]
impeded the efficient operation of the labor market regarding workplace
risk because employees--unaware of job hazards--do not seek, or
receive, full compensation for the risks they bear. As a result, even
if employers have full knowledge about the risk, their employees do
not. If employees do not have full knowledge about the risk, employers
have less incentive to invest in safer working conditions than they
would in the presence of full information since wages are suppressed
below what full knowledge by the employees would yield.
I. Lack of Employer Information
In the absence of regulation, employers may lack economic
incentives to optimally identify the safety and health risks that their
employees face.\9\ Furthermore, employers have an economic incentive to
withhold the information they do possess about job hazards from their
employees, whose response would be to demand safe working conditions or
higher wages to compensate for the risk. Relatedly, in the absence of
regulation, employers, as well as third parties, may have fewer
incentives to develop new technological solutions to protect employees
on the job.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Other private parties may lack sufficient incentives to
invest resources to collect and analyze occupational risk data due
to the public-good nature of the information. See Ashford and
Caldart (1996).
\10\ For evidence of regulatory stimuli inducing innovations to
improve employee health and safety, see, for example, Ashford et al.
(1985), as well as more recent evidence from OSHA's regulatory
reviews under section 610 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 610).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This suggests that, without regulation, and the incentives that
come with it, many employers are unlikely to make themselves aware of
the magnitude of heat-related safety and health risks in the workplace
or of the availability of effective ways of ameliorating or eliminating
these risks. OSHA believes that requiring employers to monitor heat
conditions will help to alleviate situations in which employers and/or
employees may not realize situations when heat becomes hazardous.
II. Lack of Employee Information About Health Hazards
Markets cannot adequately address the risks of occupational heat
exposure if employees and employers are unaware of the changes in risk
brought about by an employer's actions or inaction. Even if employees
and employers are aware of a risk, the employer may have limited
economic motivation to install controls unless the employees are able
to accurately assess the effects of those controls on their
occupational risks.
Accordingly, even if employees have a general understanding that
they are at increased risk of injury or illness from occupational
exposure to heat, it is unrealistic to expect, absent mandatory
regulatory requirements, that they know the precise risks associated
with different exposure levels or the exposures they are experiencing,
much less that they can use that knowledge to negotiate a significant
reduction in exposures and other protections or (if more desirable)
trade it for greater hazard pay.
Both experimental studies and observed market behavior suggest that
individuals have considerable difficulty rationally processing
information about low-probability, high-consequence events such as
occupational fatalities and long-term disabilities.\11\ For example,
many individuals may not be able to comprehend or rationally act on
risk information when it is presented, as risk analysis often is, in
mathematical terms--a 1/1,000 versus a 1/10,000 versus a 1/100,000
annual risk of death from occupational causes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The literature documenting risk perception problems is
extensive. See the classic work of Tversky and Kahneman (1974). For
a recent summary of risk perception problems and their causes
(Thaler and Sunstein, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, in the abstract, many of the problems that employers and
employees face in obtaining and processing occupational risk can lead
employees to overestimate as well as underestimate the risk. However,
some of the impacts of heat exposure may be sufficiently infrequent,
unfamiliar, or unobvious that many employees (and at least some
employers) may be completely unaware of the risk, and therefore will
underestimate it.
In addition, for markets to optimally address this risk, employees
need to be aware of the changes in risk brought about by an employer's
actions. Even if employees are aware of a risk, the employer may have
limited economic motivation to install controls or implement protective
measures unless the employees are able to accurately assess the effects
of those controls or measures on their occupational risks. Furthermore,
there is substantial evidence that most individuals are unrealistically
optimistic, even in high-stakes, high-risk situations and even if they
are aware of the statistical risks (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009).
Although the agency lacks specific evidence on the effect of these
attitudes on assessing occupational safety and health risks, this
suggests that some employees underestimate their own risk of work-
related injury or illness and, therefore, even in situations where they
have the bargaining power to do so, may not bargain for or receive
adequate compensation for bearing those risks. Finally, the difficulty
that employees have in distinguishing marginal differences in risk at
alternative worksites, both within an industry and across industries,
creates a disincentive for employers to incur the costs of reducing
workplace risk.
B. Externalities
Externalities arise when an economic transaction generates direct
positive or negative spillover effects on third parties not involved in
the transaction. The resulting spillover effect, which leads to a
divergence between private and social costs, undermines the efficient
allocation of resources in the market because the market is imparting
inaccurate cost and price signals to the transacting parties. Applied
to the labor market, when costs are externalized, they are not
reflected in the decisions that employers and their potential employees
make--leading to allocative distortions in that market.
Negative externalities exist in the labor market because many of
the costs of occupational injury and illness are borne by parties other
than individual employers or employees. The major source of these
negative externalities is the occupational injury or illness cost that
workers' compensation does not cover.\12\ Employees and their employers
often bear only a portion of these costs. Outside of workers'
compensation, employees incapacitated by an occupational injury or
illness and their families often receive health care, rehabilitation,
retraining, direct income maintenance, or life insurance benefits, much
of which are paid for by society through Social Security and other
social insurance and social welfare programs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Workers' compensation is discussed separately later in this
section. As described there, in many cases (particularly for smaller
firms), the premiums that an individual employer pays for workers'
compensation are only loosely related, or unrelated, to the
occupational risks that that employer's employees bear. In addition,
workers' compensation does not cover chronic occupational diseases
in most instances. For that reason, negative externalities tend to
be a more significant issue in the case of occupational exposures
that result in diseases.
\13\ In addition, many occupational injuries and most
occupational illnesses are not processed through the workers'
compensation system at all. In these instances, employees receive
care from their own private physician rather than from their
employer's physician.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, substantial portions of the medical care system in the
United States are heavily subsidized by the
[[Page 70805]]
government so that part of the medical cost of treating injured or ill
employees is paid for by the rest of society (Nichols and Zeckhauser,
1977). To the extent that employers and employees do not bear the full
costs of occupational injury and illness, they will ignore these
externalized costs in their labor market negotiations. The result may
be an inefficiently high level of occupational risk.
C. Imperfect Competition
In the idealized labor market, the actions of large numbers of
buyers and sellers of labor services establish the market-clearing,
risk-compensated wage, so that individual employers and employees
effectively take that wage as given. However, the labor market is not
one market, but many markets differentiated by location, occupation,
and other factors; entrants in the labor market face search frictions
because of limited information on employment options; and, furthermore,
in wage negotiations with their own employees, employers are typically
in an advantageous position relative to all other potential employers
(e.g., Card, 2022). In these situations, discussed below, employers may
have sufficient power to influence or to determine the wage their
employees receive. This may undermine the conditions necessary for
perfect competition and can result in inadequate compensation for
employees exposed to workplace hazards. Significant unemployment
levels, local or national, may also undermine the conditions necessary
for adequate compensation for exposure to workplace hazards (Hirsch et
al., 2018).
Beyond the classic--but relatively rare--example of a town
dominated by a single company, there is significant evidence that some
employers throughout the economy are not wage-takers but, rather, face
upward-sloping labor supply curves and enjoy some market power in
setting wages and other conditions of employment.\14\ An important
source of this phenomenon is the cost of a job search and the
employer's relative advantage, from size and economies of scale, in
acquiring labor market information.\15\ Another potentially noteworthy
problem in the labor market is that, contrary to the model of perfect
competition, employees with jobs cannot without cost quit and obtain a
similar job at the same wage with another employer. Employees leaving
their current job may be confronted with the expense and time
requirements of a job search, the expense associated with relocating to
take advantage of better employment opportunities, the loss of firm-
specific human capital (i.e., firm-specific skills and knowledge that
the employee possesses \16\), the cost and difficulty of upgrading job
skills, and the risk of a prolonged period of unemployment. Finally,
employers derive market power from the fact that a portion of the
compensation their employees receive is not transferable to other jobs.
Examples include job-specific training and associated compensation,
seniority rights and associated benefits, and investments in a pension
plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Borjas (2000), Ashenfelter et al. (2010), and Boal and
Ransom (1997). The term ``monopsony'' power or ``oligopsony'' power
are sometimes applied to this situation.
\15\ See Borjas (2000). As supplemental authorities, Weil (2014)
presents theory and evidence both in support of this proposition and
to show that, in many situations, larger firms have more market
power than smaller firms, while Boal and Ransom (1997) note that the
persistent wage dispersion observed in labor markets is a central
feature of equilibrium search models.
\16\ MacLeod and Nakavachara (2007) note the correlation between
firm-specific skills and relatively high income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the conditions described above, employers would not have to
take the market-clearing wage as given but could offer a lower wage
than would be observed in a perfectly competitive market,\17\ including
less than full compensation for workplace health and safety risks. As a
result, relative to the idealized competitive labor market, employers
would have less incentive to invest in workplace safety. In any event,
for reasons already discussed, an idealized wage premium is not an
adequate substitute for a workplace that puts a premium on health and
safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ For a graphical demonstration that an employer with
monopsony power will pay less than the competitive market wage, see
Borjas (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Non-Market and Quasi-Market Alternatives
The following discussion considers whether non-market and quasi-
market alternatives to the proposed standard would be capable of
protecting employees from heat hazards. The alternatives under
consideration are information dissemination programs, workers'
compensation systems, and tort liability options.
A. Information Dissemination Programs
One alternative to OSHA's proposed standard could be the
dissemination of information, either voluntarily or through compliance
with a targeted mandatory information rule, akin to OSHA's Hazard
Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), which would provide more
information about the safety and health risks associated with exposure
to environmental heat. Better informed potential employees could more
accurately assess the occupational risks associated with different
jobs, thereby facilitating, through labor market transactions, higher
risk premiums for more hazardous work and inducing employers to make
the workplace less hazardous. The proposed standard recognizes the link
between the dissemination of information and workplace risks by
requiring that employees exposed to heat be provided with information
and training about the risks they encounter and ways to mitigate those
risks. There are several reasons, however, why reliance on information
dissemination programs alone would not yield the level of employee
protection achievable through the proposed standard, which incorporates
hazard communication as part of a comprehensive approach designed to
control the hazard in addition to providing for the disclosure of
information about it.
First, in the case of voluntary information dissemination programs,
absent a regulation, there may be significant economic incentives, for
all the reasons discussed in section VIII.A.II. above, for the employer
not to gather relevant exposure data or distribute occupational risk
information so that the employees would not change jobs or demand
higher wages to compensate for their newly identified occupational
risks.
Second, even if employees were better informed about workplace
risks and hazards, all of the defects in the functioning of the private
labor market previously discussed--the limited ability of employees to
evaluate risk information, externalities, and imperfect competition--
would still apply. Because of the existence of these defects, better
information alone would not lead to wage premiums for risk that would
incentivize employers to make workplaces safer, in accordance with
compensating differentials theory (Lavetti, 2023). Regardless, as
mentioned above in section VIII.A.I., even the level of employee safety
and health attained by the wage premium under efficient markets may be
lower than the level justified by other important social values that
efficient markets may undervalue. Finally, as discussed in Section
VIII.E., Benefits, a number of additional safety provisions under the
proposed standard would complement information and training provided by
other regulatory vehicles.
Thus, while improved access to information about heat-related
hazards can provide for more rational decision-making in the private
labor market,
[[Page 70806]]
OSHA concludes that information dissemination programs would not, by
themselves, produce an adequate level of employee protection.
B. Workers' Compensation Systems
Another theoretical alternative to OSHA regulation could be to
determine that no standard is needed because State workers'
compensation programs augment the workings of the labor market to limit
occupational risks to employee safety and health. After all, one of the
objectives of the workers' compensation system is to shift the costs of
occupational injury and illness from employees to employers in order to
induce employers to improve working conditions. Two other objectives
relevant to this discussion are to provide fair and prompt compensation
to employees for medical costs and lost wages resulting from workplace
injury and illness and, through the risk-spreading features of the
workers' compensation insurance pool, to prevent individual employers
from suffering a catastrophic financial loss (Ashford, 2007).
OSHA identifies two primary reasons, discussed below, why the
workers' compensation system has fallen short of the goal of shifting
to employers the costs of workplace injury and illness--including, in
particular, the costs of employee exposure to heat-related hazards. As
a result, OSHA concludes that workers' compensation programs alone do
not adequately protect employees.
I. Limitations on Payouts
The first reason that employers do not fully pay the costs of work-
related injuries and illnesses under the workers' compensation system
is that, even for those claims that are accepted into the system,
States have imposed significant limitations on payouts. Depending on
the State, these limitations and restrictions include:
Caps on wage replacement based on the average wage in the
State rather than the injured employee's actual wage;
Restrictions on which medical care services are
compensated and the amount of that compensation;
No compensation for non-pecuniary losses, such as pain and
suffering or impairment not directly related to earning power;
Either no, or limited, cost-of-living increases;
Restrictions on permanent, partial, and total disability
benefits, either by specifying a maximum number of weeks for which
benefits can be paid or by imposing an absolute ceiling on dollar
payouts; and
A low absolute ceiling on death benefits.
II. A Divergence Between Workers' Compensation Premiums and Workplace
Risk
The second reason workers' compensation does not adequately shift
the costs of work-related injuries and illnesses to employers is that
the risk-spreading objective of workers' compensation conflicts with,
and ultimately helps to undermine, the cost-internalization
objective.\18\ For the 99 percent of employers who rely on workers'
compensation insurance,\19\ the payment of premiums represents their
primary cost for occupational injuries and illnesses, such as heat-
related injuries and illnesses. However, the mechanism for determining
an employer's workers' compensation insurance premium typically fails
to reflect the actual occupational risk present in that employer's
workplace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Recall from the earlier discussion of externalities that
the failure to internalize costs leads to allocative distortions and
inefficiencies in the market.
\19\ Only the largest firms, constituting approximately 1
percent of employers and representing approximately 15 percent of
employees, are self-insured. These individual firms accomplish risk-
spreading as a result of the large number of employees they cover
(Ashford, 2007). From 2000 to 2020, the share of Workers'
Compensation Benefits paid by self-insured employers rose from 22.0
percent to 24.7 percent (Murphy and Wolf, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximately 85 percent of employers have their premiums set based
on a ``class rating,'' which is based on industry illness and injury
history. Employers in this class are typically the smallest firms and
represent only about 15 percent of employees (Ashford, 2007). Small
firms are often ineligible for experience rating because of
insufficient claims history or because of a high year-to-year variance
in their claim rates. These firms are granted rate reductions only if
the experience of the entire class improves. The remaining 14 percent
of employers, larger firms representing approximately 70 percent of
employees, have their premiums set based on a combination of ``class
rating'' and ``experience rating,'' which adjusts the class rating to
reflect a firm's individual claims experience. A firm's experience
rating is generally based on the history of workers' compensation
payments to employees injured at that firm's workplace, not on the
quality of the firm's overall employee protection program or safety and
health record. Thus, for example, the existence of circumstances that
may lead to catastrophic future losses are not included in an
experience rating--only actual past losses are included.\20\ Insurance
companies do have the right to refuse to provide workers' compensation
insurance to an employer--and frequently exercise that right based on
their inspections and evaluations of a firm's health and safety
practices. However, almost all States have assigned risk pools that
insist that any firm that cannot obtain workers' compensation policies
from any insurer must be provided workers' compensation insurance at a
State-mandated rate that reflects a combination of class and experience
rating. Workers' compensation insurance does protect individual
employers against a catastrophic financial loss due to work-related
injury or illness claims. As a result of risk spreading, however,
employers' efforts to reduce the incidence of occupational injuries and
illnesses are not fully reflected in reduced workers' compensation
premiums. Conversely, employers who devote fewer resources to promoting
employee safety and health may not incur commensurately higher workers'
compensation costs. This creates a type of moral hazard, in that the
presence of risk spreading in workers' compensation insurance may
induce employers to make fewer investments in equipment and training to
reduce the risk of workplace injuries and illnesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ In order to spread risks in an efficient manner, it is
critical that insurers have adequate information to set individual
premiums that reflect each individual employer's risks. As the
preceding discussion has made clear, by and large, they do not. In
that sense, insurers can be added to employers and employees as
possessing imperfect information about job hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In short, the premiums most individual employers pay for workers'
compensation insurance coverage do not reflect the actual cost burden
those employers impose on the worker's compensation system.
Consequently, employers considering measures to lower the incidence of
workplace injuries and illnesses can expect to receive a less-than-
commensurate reduction in workers' compensation premiums. Thus, for all
the reasons discussed above, the workers' compensation system does not
provide adequate incentives to employers to control occupational risks
to worker safety and health.
C. Tort Liability Options
Another alternative to OSHA regulation could be for employees to
use the tort system to seek redress for work-related injuries and
illnesses, including heat-related ones.\21\ A tort is a civil
[[Page 70807]]
wrong (other than breach of contract) for which the courts can provide
a remedy by awarding damages. The application of the tort system to
occupational injury and illness would allow employees to sue their
employer, or other responsible parties where applicable (e.g., ``third
parties'' such as suppliers of hazardous material or equipment used in
the workplace) to recover damages. In theory, the tort system could
shift the liability for the direct costs of occupational injury and
illness from the employee to the employer or to other responsible
parties. In turn, the employer or third parties would be induced to
improve employee safety and health.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The OSH Act does not provide a private right of action that
would allow affected workers to sue their employers for safety
hazards subject to the Act (see Am. Fed. of Gov. Employees, AFL-CIO
v. Rumsfeld, 321 F.3d 139, 143-44 (DC Cir. 2003)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With limited exceptions, the tort system has not been a viable
alternative to occupational safety and health regulation. In addition,
State statutes make workers' compensation the ``exclusive remedy'' for
work-related injuries and illnesses. Workers' compensation is
essentially a type of no-fault insurance. In return for employers'
willingness to provide, through workers' compensation, timely wage-loss
and medical coverage for workers' job-related injuries and illnesses,
regardless of fault, employees are barred from suing their employers
for damages, except in cases of intentional harm or, in some States,
gross negligence (Ashford and Caldart, 1996). Even in cases of gross
negligence where it is possible for employees to sue, establishing
gross negligence in these incidences is complicated by heat conditions
as these conditions may be temporary and localized, and not necessarily
measured at the time of incident. Practically speaking, in most cases,
workers' compensation is the exclusive legal remedy available to
employees for workplace injuries and illnesses.
Employees are thus generally barred from suing their own employers
in tort for occupational injuries or illnesses but may attempt to
recover damages for work-related injuries and illnesses, where
applicable, from third parties through the tort system. However, it is
unlikely that a third party could be successfully sued for workplace
exposure to hazardous heat since there is no third party responsible
for exposing employees to dangerous conditions in these circumstances.
This means that even this inadequate remedy would be unavailable to
employees injured from heat exposure.
In sum, the use of the tort system as an alternative to regulation
is severely limited because of the ``exclusive remedy'' provisions in
workers' compensation statutes; because of the various legal and
practical difficulties in seeking recovery from responsible third
parties or the lack of a responsible third party altogether; and
because of the substantial costs associated with a tort action. The
tort system, therefore, does not adequately protect employees from
exposure to hazards in the workplace.
IV. Summary
OSHA's primary reasons for proposing this standard are based on the
requirements of the OSH Act, which are discussed in Section II.,
Pertinent Legal Authority. As shown in the preamble to the proposed
standard and this PEA, OSHA has determined that employees in many
industries are exposed to safety and health hazards from exposure to
environmental and process heat in the workplace. This section has shown
that labor markets--even when augmented by information dissemination
programs, workers' compensation systems, and tort liability options--
still operate at a level of risk for these employees that is higher
than socially optimal due to a lack of information about safety and
health risks, the presence of externalities or imperfect competition,
and other factors discussed above.
B. Profile of Affected Industries
I. Introduction
This section presents a profile of the entities and employees for
all industries that would be affected by OSHA's proposed standard for
Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings.
OSHA first outlines all industries that would be subject to the
proposed standard. Next, OSHA summarizes the number of entities and
employees that would be exempt from this proposed standard based on
coverage under existing standards, jurisdiction of local or State
government entities, or based on one of the exemptions in paragraph
(a)(2) of this proposed standard. Lastly, OSHA provides summary
statistics for the affected entities,\22\ including the number of
affected entities and the number of affected employees. This
information is provided for each industry (1) in total, (2) for small
entities as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) and by the
Small Business Administration (SBA), and (3) for very small entities
with fewer than 20 employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Spreadsheet detailing all calculations discussed in this
analysis are available in Analytical Support for OSHA's Preliminary
Economic Analysis for the Heat Injury and Illness Prevention (OSHA,
2024c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Potentially Affected Industries and Employees
This section characterizes the industries and employees that are
likely to be affected by the proposed standard.
A. Potentially Affected Industries
OSHA broadly characterizes industries that are potentially within
the scope of the regulatory framework as core industries \23\ and all
other covered industries. OSHA considers core industries to be those
industries where employees have the most exposure to heat-related
hazards, such as through exposure to high outdoor temperatures, radiant
heat sources, or insufficient temperature control or ventilation in
indoor work settings. Core industries include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ To identify core industries, OSHA reviewed multiple
sources. The agency reviewed its OSHA Information System (OIS)
database to identify industries with fatal and non-fatal heat-
related injuries and illnesses. In addition, OSHA identified
occupations with the most exposure to heat-related hazards by
analyzing (1) occupational information on outdoor work settings from
the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) and (2) occupation-
level data from the Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) on
exposure to process heat. Occupations flagged by those two data
sources were then mapped to detailed 2012 North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes using the Occupational
Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS). Finally, OSHA evaluated
industries that were included in OSHA's National Emphasis Program
for Outdoor and Indoor Heat Related Hazards, ANPRM comments, and
stakeholder comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing;
Building Materials and Equipment Suppliers;
Commercial Kitchens;
Construction;
Drycleaning and Commercial Laundries;
Landscaping and Facilities Support;
Maintenance and Repair;
Manufacturing;
Oil and Gas;
Postal and Delivery Services;
Recreation and Amusement;
Sanitation and Waste Removal;
Telecommunications;
Temporary Help Services;
Transportation;