The Regulatory Plan
Executive Summary: Making Worker Protections Work
A new culture of responsibility is being built at the Department of Labor (DOL) whereby its employees will be responsible for helping the regulated community understand DOL's exhaustive list of rules and regulations. The Department understands that before any business or other regulated entity can comply with DOL's rules, they must be understandable and communicated clearly.
Since its creation in 1913, the Department of Labor has been guided by the idea that employers must be held responsible for the protection of their employees — protection of their wages, pensions, safety and health. In turn, the Department of Labor recognizes that it is responsible for helping employers and others understand and comply with their responsibilities under the Department's many laws and regulations.
The Department has always known that the vast majority of employers work hard to keep their employees and workplaces safe and secure and that employers who knowingly neglect or abuse their employees are a very small minority. DOL must provide this vast majority who want to comply with the knowledge and tools they need to carry out their legal responsibilities and obligations. To ensure DOL does this, the Secretary has made protecting workers through compliance assistance one of her top priorities. Her compliance assistance initiative is based on the proven success that comes when Government, employers, unions and employees work together to ensure that worker protections work.
As an essential part of this initiative, the Department of Labor is making the information it provides, including new or revised regulations, clearer, more helpful and more accessible. DOL has developed compliance materials in plain language, as well as online programs that answer questions and direct users to information that is easy to understand. DOL also is using its Web site, e-mail, toll-free numbers (e.g., the Call Center), and partnerships to convey this information when and where it is needed. And employers know that requesting compliance assistance materials through any of these means will not lead to referrals for investigation.
DOL's goal is to touch every workplace in a positive way, through sharing information and offering a helping hand. DOL will emphasize prevention, relying on the use of common-sense standards of safety and fairness to prevent workers from being harmed physically or economically. Education and encouragement of employers will help workers far more than enforcement alone, since no enforcement process can possibly identify every violation of the law, and fines and penalties can never fully redress losses of life, health, and economic well-being.
DOL has responsibilities beyond worker protection. It recognizes that the emerging 21st century economy presents challenges to workers at all skill levels and in all walks of life. Those who have been laid off from jobs because their companies could not adapt to technological changes or foreign competition, or those workers who are disabled, who did not get a full education, or who made a wrong turn at some point in their lives, cannot be left behind. Some of these workers, especially young workers, need training in basic skills and help in becoming acclimated to working life. Other workers need assistance in learning new skills or in obtaining advanced schooling.
At the same time, high-technology industries are creating job opportunities unheard of even a decade ago. DOL must help employers and workers bridge the gap between the requirements of those jobs and the skills of the workers who are needed to fill them. Workers who can keep their skills up to date throughout their careers have more productive and more rewarding economic futures.
The Secretary of Labor's Regulatory Plan for Accomplishing These Objectives
The balance between labor and management that underlies the country's labor laws is a crucial source of stability in our economy, and the need for labor and management to work together has become increasingly evident in recent years. For these reasons, any change in the regulations that implement the country's labor laws must be carefully considered, and the views of all affected parties must be taken into account.
In general, DOL will try to help employees and employers meet their needs in a cooperative fashion, with a minimum of rulemaking. However, to reflect changes in technology and business practices, to implement new laws and clarify existing rules in light of new laws and legal interpretations, and to rewrite rules in plain language, DOL needs to engage in rulemaking.
In doing so, DOL will craft proposals that are responsive to workers' needs yet understanding of employers' desire for the least burdensome regulatory alternative. These proposals will span an entire range of work environments, from traditional settings that have well-defined conditions and locations of work, to newly emerging settings that are more flexibly structured in terms of schedules and workplaces.
Similarly, the skills needed by today's workforce are more varied than at any time in our country's history, and they continue to change at a rapid rate. Changes in the financial marketplace, as well as in compensation and benefit arrangements, present both challenges and opportunities for today's workers.
The following proposals represent what DOL believes to be a balanced plan for protecting workers in their current jobs and preparing them for future employment while making it easier for the regulated community to play its part. DOL considers these proposals to be proactive, common-sense approaches to the issues most clearly needing regulatory attention.
The Department's Regulatory Priorities
DOL has identified 20 high-priority items for regulatory action. Nine of them address health and safety issues, which are central to DOL's mission and which represent a major focus of the Secretary. Two agencies, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), are responsible for these initiatives.
MSHA administers the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act). The agency demonstrates its commitment to ensuring safer and healthier workplaces for the Nation's miners in a number of ways, but Government intervention alone cannot eliminate occupational deaths, injuries and illnesses in mining. The commitment of miners and mine operators is also needed. MSHA will continue to concentrate on improving existing health standards and addressing emerging health hazards in mining.
While levels of respirable coal dust have been significantly reduced over the years, some miners continue to develop coal workers' pneumoconiosis. MSHA intends to reopen the record for the rulemaking on the Determination of Concentration of Respirable Coal Mine Dust (RIN 1219-AB18), and repropose Verification of Underground Coal Mine Operators' Dust Control Plans and Compliance Sampling for Respirable Dust (RIN 1219-AB14). The former rule would permit MSHA to determine the level of mine dust on the basis of a single sample. The latter rule would help assure that operators' dust control plans are effective under typical mining conditions. These rules work in tandem to address miners' exposure to respirable coal dust.
MSHA is considering lowering the permissible exposure limit (PEL) for asbestos at metal and nonmetal and coal mines, addressing take-home contamination, and reevaluating the method used for sample analysis (RIN 1219-AB24). MSHA conducted a series of public meetings earlier this year to allow early participation in the rulemaking by interested parties. MSHA will be evaluating those comments as it prepares a notice of proposed rulemaking.
In response to litigation and a partial settlement agreement regarding its final rule on Diesel Particulate Matter, MSHA has initiated a rulemaking on Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure of Underground Metal and Nonmetal Miners (RIN 1219-AB29). MSHA will address several provisions of the final standard, including changing the diesel particulate matter surrogate from total carbon to elemental carbon for the concentration limits, addressing the diesel particulate matter control plan, and revising requirements regarding the use of personal protective equipment and administrative controls to comply with the concentration limits.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration administers a wide range of measures throughout the public and private sectors. OSHA is committed to establishing clear and sensible priorities, reducing occupational deaths, injuries, and illnesses, and simplifying its recordkeeping requirements.
Three of OSHA's high-priority initiatives address health standards. The first, Standards Improvement, will streamline a number of such health standards by removing language that is outdated, duplicative, unnecessary or inconsistent (RIN 1218-AB81). These changes will reduce the amount of time and effort needed to understand and comply with these standards.
The second, a revision to the Respiratory Protection Standard, will address Assigned Protection Factors for different types of respirators (RIN 1218-AA05). This action will improve respiratory protection for employees required to wear respirators, as well as making it easier for employers to choose the appropriate respirator for a given task.
OSHA's third initiative in the area of health standards addresses worker exposure to Crystalline Silica (RIN 1218-AB70). This substance is one of the most widely found in workplaces, and data have indicated that exposure to it may cause a debilitating respiratory disease called silicosis. Exposure also has been linked to cancer. OSHA is collecting information to determine what regulatory action might be appropriate to address these occupational health concerns.
OSHA has two initiatives in the area of safety standards. The first concerns Fires in Shipyards (RIN 1218-AB51). A negotiated rulemaking committee completed its work earlier this year, and recommended regulatory actions to address this issue. Fires in shipyards claim an average of one life a year, as well as causing 110 lost-workday "heat/burn" injuries, and more than three times that many total injuries. This rule will provide a comprehensive approach to dealing with fires in shipyard environments to help prevent these deaths and injuries.
OSHA's second safety initiative addresses requirements for Exit Routes, formerly known as Means of Egress (RIN 1218-AB82). OSHA has rewritten these important provisions in plain language to help ensure they are properly understood and implemented.
Protection of pension and health benefits continues to be a priority of the Secretary of Labor. As a member of the President's Task Force to strengthen retirement security, the Secretary played a major role in formulating legislative proposals to give workers better information about their pension rights, increased freedom to choose where to invest their retirement savings, and expanded access to investment advice. Two of these proposals were enacted as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Consistent with the Secretary's priorities, the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA), which administers the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), will focus on implementation of the recently enacted retirement security amendments to ERISA relating to the timely notification of participants and beneficiaries of periods during which they will be unable to direct investments in their 401(k) plan (RIN 1210-AA90) and civil penalties for failures to provide these notices (RIN 1210-AA91).
PWBA's regulatory program also will focus on compliance assistance to group health plans through issuance of guidance, as well as model forms and notices. Specific initiatives include guidance for group health plans on the application of the continuation of coverage notice provisions (RIN 1210-AA60); access, portability and renewability provisions (RIN 1210-AA54); and nondiscrimination provisions of ERISA (RIN 1210-AA77).
ERISA's requirements affect an estimated 730,000 private sector employee pension benefit plans (covering approximately 99 million participants); an estimated 2.5 million group health benefit plans (covering 131 million participants and dependents); and 3.4 million other welfare benefits plans (covering approximately 190 million participants).
The Secretary's emphasis on meeting the needs of the 21st century workforce is reflected in the first regulatory initiative developed by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA). ETA will issue regulations reflecting recent changes to the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program, as enacted in the Trade Act of 2002 (RIN 1205-AB32). The proposed rule would address the many new features of the TAA program: consolidation of the TAA and NAFTA-TAA programs; immediate services to workers to facilitate more rapid reemployment; expanded eligibility; increased benefits, including health care assistance; and an Alternative TAA Program for older workers. The new regulations will be in plain English, making them easier to read and use.
ETA's second regulatory initiative also focuses on meeting the needs of our workforce by improving the quality of employment services provided to low-income senior citizens under the Older Americans Act (RIN 1205-AB28). These individuals often need assistance in developing skills and obtaining work experience so that they can obtain unsubsidized work. This rule will also improve performance accountability and enhance the ability of the States to coordinate services.
In its third initiative, ETA proposes to reengineer the permanent labor certification process (RIN 1205-AA66). ETA's goals are to make fundamental changes that will streamline the process; save resources; improve the effectiveness of the program; and better serve the Department of Labor's customers.
Finally, the Employment Standards Administration (ESA) has set forth three priority regulatory initiatives. Among the statutes enforced by the Wage and Hour Division is the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets requirements for payment of minimum wages and overtime pay to more than 100 million employees. It also defines conditions for the employment of minors.
The Wage and Hour Division's first initiative updates the child labor rules issued under the FLSA to address changes in the nature of the workplace and situations in which minors may operate certain kinds of machinery (RIN 1215-AA09). While young workers need employment experiences that will help them gain the skills needed to find and hold good jobs later in life, they also need to focus on obtaining high-quality educations, and ensuring that their work hours are reasonable will help them do so.
The Wage and Hour Division's second initiative revises and clarifies the criteria that define the minimum wage and overtime exemptions for "executive," "administrative," "professional," and "outside sales" employees under the FLSA (RIN 1215-AA14). These regulations were nominated for reform in a public comment on OMB's 2001 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Regulations. The issues of concern raised by various interested parties are being carefully examined in the development of proposed changes. Changes to these rules will help employers meet their obligations voluntarily and enhance workers' understanding of their rights and benefits.
The Wage and Hour Division's third initiative pertains to regulations issued under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) that were also nominated as a reform candidate in OMB's 2001 Report to Congress on Costs and Benefits of Regulations. Revisions will be proposed to the FMLA's implementing regulations to address issues raised by the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 122 S. Ct. 1155 (2002), and the decisions of other courts.
82. DEFINING AND DELIMITING THE TERM "ANY EMPLOYEE EMPLOYED IN A BONA FIDE EXECUTIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE, OR PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY" (ESA/W-H)
Agency:
DOL—Employment Standards Administration (ESA)
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
29 USC 213(a)(1)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 541
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
These regulations set forth the criteria for exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage and overtime requirements for "executive," "administrative," "professional," and "outside sales employees." To be exempt, employees must meet certain tests relating to duties and responsibilities and be paid on a salary basis at specified levels. A final rule increasing the salary test levels was published on January 13, 1981 (46 FR 3010), to become effective on February 13, 1981, but was indefinitely stayed on February 12, 1981 (46 FR 11972). On March 27, 1981, a proposal to suspend the final rule indefinitely was published (46 FR 18998), with comments due by April 28, 1981. As a result of numerous comments and petitions from industry groups on the duties and responsibilities tests, and as a result of case law developments, the Department concluded that a more comprehensive review of these regulations was needed. An ANPRM reopening the comment period and broadening the scope of review to include all aspects of the regulations was published on November 19, 1985, with the comment period subsequently extended to March 22, 1986.
The Department has revised these regulations since the ANPRM to address specific issues. In 1991, as the result of an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the regulations were revised to permit certain computer systems analysts, computer programmers, software engineers, and other similarly skilled professional employees to qualify for the exemption, including those paid on an hourly basis if their rates of pay exceed 6 1/2 times the applicable minimum wage. Also, in 1992 the Department issued a final rule which modified the exemption's requirement for payment on a "salary basis" for otherwise exempt public sector employees.
Statement of Need:
These regulations contain the criteria used to determine if an employee is exempt from the FLSA as an "executive," "administrative," "professional," or "outside sales" employee. The existing salary test levels used in determining which employees qualify as exempt were adopted in 1975 on an interim basis. These salary level tests are outdated and offer little practical guidance in applying the exemption. In addition, numerous comments and petitions have been received from industry groups regarding the duties and responsibilities tests in the regulations, requesting a review of these regulations.
These regulations have been revised to deal with specific issues. In 1991, as the result of an amendment to the FLSA, the regulations were revised to permit certain computer systems analysts, computer programmers, software engineers, and other similarly skilled professional employees to qualify for the exemption, including those paid on an hourly basis if their rates of pay exceed 6 1/2 times the applicable minimum wage. Also in 1991, the Department undertook separate rulemaking on another aspect of the regulations, the definition of "salary basis" for public-sector employees. Because of the limited nature of these revisions, the regulations are still in need of updating and clarification.
Summary of Legal Basis:
These regulations are issued under the statutory exemption from minimum wage and overtime pay provided by section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 USC 213(a)(1), which requires the Secretary of Labor to issue regulations that define and delimit the terms "any employee employed in a bona fide, executive, administrative, or professional capacity... or in the capacity of outside salesman..." for purposes of applying the exemption to employees who meet the specified criteria.
Alternatives:
The Department will involve affected interest groups in developing regulatory alternatives. Following completion of these outreach and consultation activities, full regulatory alternatives will be developed.
Although legislative proposals have been introduced in Congress to address certain aspects of these regulations, the Department continues to believe revisions to the regulations are the appropriate response to the concerns raised. Alternatives likely to be considered range from particular changes to address "salary basis" and salary level issues to a comprehensive overhaul of the regulations that also addresses the duties and responsibilities tests.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Some 19 to 26 million employees are estimated to be within the scope of these regulations. Legal developments in court cases are changing the guiding interpretations under this exemption and creating law without considering a comprehensive analytical approach to current compensation concepts and workplace practices. Clear, comprehensive, and up-to-date regulations would provide for central, uniform control over the application of these regulations and ameliorate many concerns. In the public sector, State and local government employers contend that the rules are based on production workplace environments from the 1940s and 1950s that do not readily adapt to contemporary government functions. The Federal Government also has concerns regarding the manner in which the courts and arbitration decisions are applying the exemption to the Federal workforce. Resolution of confusion over how the regulations are to be applied in the public sector will ensure that employees are protected, that employers are able to comply with their responsibilities under the law, and that the regulations are enforceable. Preliminary estimates of the specific costs and benefits of this regulatory action will be developed once the various regulatory alternatives are identified.
Risks:
This action does not affect public health, safety, or the environment.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Indefinite Stay of Final Rule | 02/12/81 | 46 FR 11972 |
| Proposal To Suspend Rule | 03/27/81 | 46 FR 18998 |
| ANPRM | 11/19/85 | 50 FR 47696 |
| Extension of ANPRM Comment Period | 01/17/86 | 51 FR 2525 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 03/22/86 | |
| NPRM | 01/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations
Government Levels Affected:
State, Local, Federal
Federalism:
This action may have federalism implications as defined in EO 13132.
Agency Contact:
Tammy D. McCutchen
Administrator, Wage and Hour Division
Department of Labor
Employment Standards Administration
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
FP Building Room S3502
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0051
Fax: 202 693-1432
RIN:
1215-AA14
83. ¤ FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993
Agency:
DOL—ESA
Priority:
Other Significant
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
29 USC 2654
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 825
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 122 S. Ct. 1155 (2002), invalidated regulatory provisions issued under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) pertaining to the effects of an employer's failure to timely designate leave that is taken by an employee as being covered by the FMLA. The Department intends to propose revisions to the FMLA regulations to address issues raised by this and other judicial decisions.
Statement of Need:
The FMLA requires covered employers to grant eligible employees up to 12 workweeks of unpaid, job-protected leave a year for specified family and medical reasons, and to maintain group health benefits during the leave as if the employees continued to work instead of taking leave. When an eligible employee returns from FMLA leave, the employer must restore the employee to the same or an equivalent job with equivalent pay, benefits, and other conditions of employment. FMLA makes it unlawful for an employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of any right provided by the FMLA.
The FMLA regulations require employers to designate if an employee's use of leave is counting against the employee's FMLA leave entitlement, and to notify the employee of that designation (29 CFR section 825.208). Section 825.700(a) of the regulations provides that if an employee takes paid or unpaid leave and the employer does not designate the leave as FMLA leave, the leave taken does not count against the employee's 12 weeks of FMLA leave entitlement.
On March 19, 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 122 S. Ct. 1155 (2002). In that decision, the Court invalidated regulatory provisions pertaining to the effects of an employer's failure to timely designate leave that is taken by an employee as being covered by the FMLA. The Court ruled that 29 CFR section 825.700(a) was invalid absent evidence that the employer's failure to designate the leave as FMLA leave interfered with the employee's exercise of FMLA rights. This proposed rule is being prepared to address issues raised by this and other judicial decisions.
Summary of Legal Basis:
This rule is issued pursuant to section 404 of the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. section 2654.
Alternatives:
After completing a review and analysis of the Supreme Court's decision in Ragsdale and other judicial decisions, regulatory alternatives will be developed for notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The costs and benefits of this rulemaking action are not expected to exceed $100 million per year or otherwise trigger economic significance under Executive Order 12866.
Risks:
This rulemaking action does not directly affect risks to public health, safety, or the environment.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 01/00/03 | |
| NPRM Comment Period End | 03/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Federalism:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
Tammy D. McCutchen
Administrator, Wage and Hour Division
Department of Labor
Employment Standards Administration
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
FP Building Room S3502
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0051
Fax: 202 693-1432
RIN:
1215-AB35
84. CHILD LABOR REGULATIONS, ORDERS, AND STATEMENTS OF INTERPRETATION (ESA/W-H)
Agency:
DOL—ESA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
29 USC 203(e)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 570
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Section 3(l) of the Fair Labor Standards Act requires the Secretary of Labor to issue regulations with respect to minors between 14 and 16 years of age ensuring that the periods and conditions of their employment do not interfere with their schooling, health, or well-being. The Secretary is also directed to designate occupations that are particularly hazardous for minors 16 and 17 years of age. Child Labor Regulation No. 3 sets forth the permissible industries and occupations in which 14- and 15-year-olds may be employed, and specifies the number of hours in a day and in a week, and time periods within a day, that such minors may be employed. The Department has invited public comment in considering whether changes in technology in the workplace and job content over the years require new hazardous occupation orders, and whether changes are needed in some of the applicable hazardous occupation orders. Comment has also been solicited on whether revisions should be considered in the permissible hours and time-of-day standards for 14- and 15-year-olds. Comment has been sought on appropriate changes required to implement school-to-work transition programs. Additionally, Congress enacted Public Law 104-174 (August 6, 1996), which amended FLSA section 13(c) and requires changes in the regulations under Hazardous Occupation Order No. 12 regarding power-driven paper balers and compactors, to allow 16- and 17-year-olds to load, but not operate or unload, machines meeting applicable American National Standards Institute (ANSI) safety standards and certain other conditions. Congress also passed the Drive for Teen Employment Act, Public Law 105-334 (October 31, 1998), which prohibits minors under age 17 from driving automobiles and trucks on public roads on the job and sets criteria for 17-year-olds to drive such vehicles on public roads on the job.
Statement of Need:
Because of changes in the workplace and the introduction of new processes and technologies, the Department is undertaking a comprehensive review of the regulatory criteria applicable to child labor. Other factors necessitating a review of the child labor regulations are changes in places where young workers find employment opportunities, the existence of differing Federal and State standards, and the divergent views on how best to correlate school and work experiences.
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Secretary of Labor is directed to provide by regulation or by order for the employment of youth between 14 and 16 years of age under periods and conditions which will not interfere with their schooling, health and well-being. The Secretary is also directed to designate occupations that are particularly hazardous for youth between the ages of 16 and 18 years or detrimental to their health or well-being. The Secretary has done so by specifying, in regulations, the permissible industries and occupations in which 14- and 15-year-olds may be employed, and the number of hours per day and week and the time periods within a day in which they may be employed. In addition, these regulations designate the occupations declared particularly hazardous for minors between 16 and 18 years of age or detrimental to their health or well-being.
Public comment has been invited in considering whether changes in technology in the workplace and job content over the years require new hazardous occupation orders or necessitate revision to some of the existing hazardous orders. Comment has also been invited on whether revisions should be considered in the permissible hours and time-of-day standards for the employment of 14- and 15-year-olds, and whether revisions should be considered to facilitate school-to-work transition programs. When issuing the regulatory proposals (after review of public comments on the advance notice of proposed rulemaking), the Department's focus was on assuring healthy, safe and fair workplaces for young workers, and at the same time promoting job opportunities for young people and making regulatory standards less burdensome to the regulated community.
Summary of Legal Basis:
These regulations are issued under sections 3(l), 11, 12, and 13 of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 USC sections 203(l), 211, 212, and 213 which require the Secretary of Labor to issue regulations prescribing permissible time periods and conditions of employment for minors between 14 and 16 years old so as not to interfere with their schooling, health, or well-being, and to designate occupations that are particularly hazardous or detrimental to the health or well-being of minors under 18 years old.
Alternatives:
Regulatory alternatives developed based on recent legislation and the public comments responding to the advance notice of proposed rulemaking included specific proposed additions or modifications to the paper baler, teen driving, explosive materials, and roofing hazardous occupation orders, and proposed changes to the permissible cooking activities that 14- and 15-year-olds may perform in retail establishments.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits of this regulatory action indicated that the rule was not economically significant. Benefits will include safer working environments and the avoidance of injuries with respect to young workers.
Risks:
The child labor regulations, by ensuring that permissible job opportunities for working youth are safe and healthy and not detrimental to their education as required by the statute, produce positive benefits by reducing health and productivity costs employers may otherwise incur from higher accident and injury rates to young and inexperienced workers. Given the limited nature of the changes in the proposed rule, a detailed assessment of the magnitude of risk was not prepared.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Final Action | 11/20/91 | 56 FR 58626 |
| Final Action Effective | 12/20/91 | |
| ANPRM | 05/13/94 | 59 FR 25167 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 08/11/94 | 59 FR 40318 |
| NPRM | 11/30/99 | 64 FR 67130 |
| NPRM Comment Period End | 01/31/00 | |
| Final Action | 12/00/02 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Tammy D. McCutchen
Administrator, Wage and Hour Division
Department of Labor
Employment Standards Administration
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
FP Building Room S3502
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0051
Fax: 202 693-1432
RIN:
1215-AA09
85. SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Agency:
DOL—Employment and Training Administration (ETA)
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Legal Authority:
42 USC 3056(b)(2)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
20 CFR 641
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The Employment and Training Administration will implement new regulations to govern the Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP) under title V of the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000. SCSEP is the only federally sponsored job creation program targeted to low-income older Americans. The program subsidizes part-time community service jobs for low-income persons age 55 years and older who have poor employment prospects. Approximately 100,000 program enrollees annually work in a wide variety of community service jobs, including nurse's aides, teacher aides, librarians, clerical workers and day care assistants. The Department of Labor allocates funds to operate the program to State agencies on aging and to national organizations.
Proposed regulations will improve integration of SCSEP with the broader workforce investment system and introduce performance measures and sanctions.
Statement of Need:
As the baby boom generation ages, the demand for employment and training services and income support for low-income older persons will increase. Low-income seniors generally must continue working and many may not be able to find employment without work experience and additional training. The basic goals of the SCSEP are to provide community service employment for older workers with few skills and little work experience, and to move many of those seniors into unsubsidized employment. The Employment and Training Administration will issue regulations and other guidance, provide technical assistance, and establish performance standards that will drive State and national grantees' efforts towards the program's goals.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Promulgation of these regulations is authorized by section 502(b)(2) of Pub. L. 106-501 of the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000.
Alternatives:
The public provided comments on changes to the statute due to the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000 during Town Hall meetings held throughout the country in spring 2001. The public also will be afforded an opportunity to comment on the Department's plans for implementing the Amendments in a notice of proposed rulemaking that will be published in the Federal Register.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs of this regulatory action have not been determined at this time and will be determined at a later date.
Risks:
This action does not affect public health, safety, or the environment.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 01/00/03 | |
| Final Action | 05/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
State, Local, Tribal, Federal
Federalism:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
Erich W. Larisch
Chief, Divison of Older Worker Programs
Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
FP Building, Room N4645
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-3742
Fax: 202 693-3817
Email: larische@doleta.gov
RIN:
1205-AB28
86. ¤ TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR WORKERS
Agency:
DOL—ETA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
19 USC 2320
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
20 CFR 617; 29 CFR 90
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The Trade Act of 2002, enacted on August 6, 2002, contains provisions amending title 2, chapter 2 of the Trade Act of 1974, entitled Adjustment Assistance for Workers. The amendments, effective 90 days from enactment (November 4, 2002), make additions to where and by whom a petition may be filed, expand eligibility to workers whose production has been shifted to certain foreign countries and to worker groups secondarily affected, and make substantive amendments regarding trade adjustment assistance (TAA) program benefits.
Additionally, a final rule implementing the 1988 Amendments to the TAA program was published in the Federal Register on January 6, 1994. Although published as a final rule, comments were requested on several material changes, which were not included in the proposed rule. Comments were received and will be considered and included in the final rule implementing the amendments under the Trade Act of 2002.
Furthermore, it is the agency's intention to rewrite both 20 CFR 20 part 617 and 29 FR 29 part 90 in plain English.
Statement of Need:
The Trade Act of 2002, enacted August 6, 2002, repeals the North American Free Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance provisions for workers affected by the NAFTA Implementation Act and adds significant amendments to worker benefits under Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers, as provided for in the Trade Act of 1974.
The Department is mandated to implement the amendments in 90 days from enactment, November 4, 2002. The 2002 Trade Act amends where and by whom a petition may be filed. Program benefits for TAA eligible recipients are expanded to include for the first time a health care tax credit, and eligible recipients now include secondarily affected workers impacted by foreign trade. Income support is extended by 26 weeks and by up to one year under certain conditions. Waivers of training requirements in order to receive income support are explicitly defined. Job search and relocation benefit amounts are increased. Within one year of enactment, the amendments offer an Alternative TAA Program for Older Workers that targets older worker groups at firms who are certified as TAA eligible and provides the option of a wage supplement instead of training, job search, relocation and income support.
State agencies rely on the regulations to make determinations as to individual eligibility for TAA program benefits. TAA program regulations as written have been described as complicated to interpret. With the new TAA program benefit amendments contained in the Trade Act of 2002, it is imperative that the regulations be in an easy to read and understandable format.
Summary of Legal Basis:
These regulations are authorized by the Trade Act of 2002 amendments to the Trade Act of 1974.
Alternatives:
The public will be afforded an opportunity to provide comments on the TAA program changes when the Department publishes the interim final rule in the Federal Register.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs of this regulatory action have not been determined at this time and will be determined at a later date.
Risks:
This action does not affect public health, safety, or the environment.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 12/00/02 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
State, Federal
Agency Contact:
Edward A. Tomchick
Assistance
Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
Room C5311
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-3577
Fax: 202 693-3585
Email: etomchick@doleta.gov
RIN:
1205-AB32
87. LABOR CERTIFICATION PROCESS FOR THE PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS IN THE UNITED STATES
Agency:
DOL—ETA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
29 USC 49 et seq; 8 USC 1182(a)(5)(A), 1189(p)(1)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
20 CFR 656
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) is in the process of reengineering the permanent labor certification process. ETA's goals are to make fundamental changes and refinements that will streamline the process, save resources, improve the effectiveness of the program and better serve the Department of Labor's (DOL) customer.
Statement of Need:
The labor certification process has been described as being complicated, costly and time consuming. Due to the increases in the volume of applications received and a lack of adequate resources, it can take up to 2 years or more to complete processing an application. The process also requires substantial State and Federal resources to administer and is reportedly costly and burdensome to employers as well. Cuts in Federal funding for both the permanent labor certification program and the U.S. Employment Service have made it difficult for State and Federal administrators to keep up with the process. ETA, therefore, is taking steps to improve effectiveness of the various regulatory requirements and the application processing procedures, with a view to achieving savings in resources both for the Government and employers, without diminishing protections now afforded U.S. workers by the current regulatory and administrative requirements.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Promulgation of these regulations is authorized by section 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Alternatives:
Regulatory alternatives are now being developed by the Department. The public will be afforded an opportunity to comment on the Department's plans for streamlining the permanent labor certification process in a notice of proposed rulemaking which will be published in the Federal Register.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits have not been determined at this time. Preliminary estimates will be developed after a decision is made as to what regulatory amendments are necessary and after the implementing forms and automated systems to support a streamlined permanent labor certification process have been developed.
Risks:
This action does not affect public health, safety, or the environment.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 05/06/02 | 67 FR 30465 |
| NPRM Comment Period End | 07/05/02 | 67 FR 30466 |
| Final Rule | 01/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
State, Federal
Agency Contact:
Dale Ziegler
Certification
Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Room C4318
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2942
Fax: 202 693-2760
Email: dmziegler@doleta.gov
RIN:
1205-AA66
88. RULEMAKING RELATING TO NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUATION OF HEALTH CARE COVERAGE
Agency:
DOL—Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA)
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
29 USC 1135; 29 USC 1166
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 2590
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
This rulemaking will provide guidance concerning the notification requirements pertaining to continuation coverage under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Section 606 of ERISA requires that group health plans provide employees notification of the continuation coverage provisions of the plan and imposes notification obligations upon plan administrators, employers, employees, and qualified beneficiaries relating to certain qualifying events.
Statement of Need:
Part 6 of title I of ERISA requires that group health plans provide employees with notice of the continuation of health care coverage provisions of the plan; it imposes notification requirements upon employers, employees, plan administrators, and qualified beneficiaries in connection with certain qualifying events. The public needs guidance from the Department with regard to how they can fulfill their respective obligations under these statutory provisions.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 606 of ERISA specifies the respective notification requirements for employers, employees, plan administrators, and qualified beneficiaries in connection with group health plan provisions relating to continuation of health care coverage. Section 606(a) of ERISA specifically refers to regulations to be issued by the Secretary of Labor clarifying these requirements. Section 505 of ERISA authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations clarifying the provisions of title I of ERISA.
Alternatives:
Regulatory alternatives will be developed once determinations have been made with regard to the scope and nature of the regulatory guidance which is needed by the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits will be developed once decisions are reached regarding the alternatives to be considered.
Risks:
Failure to provide guidance to the public concerning their notification obligations under section 606 of ERISA may complicate compliance by the public with the law and may reduce the availability of continued health care coverage in certain commonly encountered situations.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| ANPRM | 09/23/97 | 62 FR 49894 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 11/24/97 | |
| NPRM | 03/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Organizations
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Susan G. Lahne
Department of Labor
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
Room N5669
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8500
RIN:
1210-AA60
89. REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE HEALTH CARE ACCESS, PORTABILITY, AND RENEWABILITY PROVISIONS OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996
Agency:
DOL—PWBA
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
29 USC 1027; 29 USC 1059; 29 USC 1135; 29 USC 1171; 29 USC 1172; 29 USC 1191c
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 2590
Legal Deadline:
Other, Statutory, April 1, 1997, Interim Final Rule.
Abstract:
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) amended title I of ERISA by adding a new part 7, designed to improve health care access, portability and renewability. This rulemaking will provide regulatory guidance to implement these provisions.
Statement of Need:
In general, the health care portability provisions in part 7 of ERISA provide for increased portability and availability of group health coverage through limitations on the imposition of any preexisting condition exclusion and special enrollment rights in group health plans after loss of other health coverage or a life event. Plan sponsors, administrators and participants need guidance from the Department with regard to how they can fulfill their respective obligations under these statutory provisions.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Part 7 of ERISA specifies the portability and other requirements for group health plans and health insurance issuers. Section 734 of ERISA provides that the Secretary may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of part 7 of ERISA. In addition, section 505 of ERISA authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations clarifying the provisions of title I of ERISA.
Alternatives:
Regulatory alternatives will be considered after determining the scope and nature of additional regulatory guidance needed by the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Determinations on the anticipated costs and benefits will be developed once determinations have been made with regard to the alternatives to be developed.
Risks:
Failure to provide guidance concerning Part 7 of ERISA may impede compliance with the law.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Interim Final Rule | 04/08/97 | 62 FR 16894 |
| Interim Final Rule Effective | 06/07/97 | |
| Interim Final Rule Comment Period End | 07/07/97 | |
| Request for Information | 10/25/99 | 64 FR 57520 |
| Comment Period End | 01/25/00 | |
| Final Rule | 03/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Amy Turner
Pension Law Specialist
Department of Labor
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
Room N5677
200 Constitution Avenue NW
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8335
RIN:
1210-AA54
90. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PARTICIPANTS AND BENEFICIARIES BASED ON HEALTH STATUS
Agency:
DOL—PWBA
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Legal Authority:
29 USC 1027; 29 USC 1059; 29 USC 1135; 29 USC 1194; 29 USC 1182; 29 USC 1191c
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 2590.702
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Section 702 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, amended by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), establishes that a group health plan or a health insurance issuer may not establish rules for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll under the terms of the plan based on any health status-related factor. These provisions are also contained in the Internal Revenue Code under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Treasury, and the Public Health Service Act under the jurisdiction of the Department of Health and Human Services.
On April 8, 1997, the Department, in conjunction with the Departments of the Treasury and Health and Human Services (collectively, the Departments) published interim final regulations implementing the nondiscrimination provisions of HIPAA. These regulations can be found at 26 CFR 54.9802-1 (Treasury), 29 CFR 2590.702 (Labor), and 45 CFR 146.121 (HHS). That notice of rulemaking also solicited comments on the nondiscrimination provisions and indicated that the Departments intend to issue further regulations on the nondiscrimination rules. This rulemaking contains additional regulatory interim guidance under HIPAA's nondiscrimination provisions. In addition, the rulemaking contains proposed guidance on bona fide wellness programs.
Statement of Need:
Part 7 of ERISA establishes that group health plans and health insurance issuers may not establish rules for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll under the terms of the plan based on any health status-related factor. Plan sponsors, administrators and participants need additional guidance from the Department with regard to how they can fulfill their respective obligations under these statutory provisions.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 702 of ERISA specifies the respective nondiscrimination requirements for group health plans and health insurance issuers. Section 734 of ERISA provides that the Secretary may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of part 7 ERISA. In addition, section 505 of ERISA authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations clarifying the provisions of title I of ERISA.
Alternatives:
Regulatory alternatives will be considered after determining the scope and nature of additional regulatory guidance needed by the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Determinations on the anticipated costs and benefits will be developed once determinations have been made with regard to the alternatives to be developed.
Risks:
Failure to provide guidance concerning part 7 of ERISA may impede compliance with the law.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Interim Final Rule | 04/08/97 | 62 FR 16894 |
| Interim Final Rule Comment Period End | 07/07/97 | |
| NPRM | 01/08/01 | 66 FR 1421 |
| Second Interim Final Rule | 01/08/01 | 66 FR 1378 |
| NPRM Comment Period End | 04/09/01 | |
| Interim Final Rule Comment Period End | 04/09/01 | |
| Final Rule | 04/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information:
This item has been split off from RIN 1210-AA54 in order to provide focused guidance on section 702 of ERISA, which prohibits discrimination against participants and beneficiaries by group health plans and health insurance issuers based on health status.
Agency Contact:
Amy Turner
Pension Law Specialist
Department of Labor
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
Room N5677
200 Constitution Avenue NW
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8335
RIN:
1210-AA77
91. ¤ BLACKOUT NOTICE REGULATION
Agency:
DOL—PWBA
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
PL 107-204; 29 USC 1135; 116 Stat 745 (29 USC 1132)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 2520
Legal Deadline:
Other, Statutory, October 13, 2002, Interim Final Rule, PL 107-204.
Abstract:
This regulation will provide guidance with respect to the requirement that plan administrators furnish advance notice of blackout periods affecting individual account plans pursuant to section 101(i) of ERISA, as added by section 306 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Statement of Need:
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act), amended ERISA by adding a new section 101(i), which requires plan administrators to notify individual account plan participants in advance of any period during which their ability to give investment directions will be suspended. The Act also added a new section 502(c)(7) to ERISA authorizing the Secretary of Labor to assess civil penalties against a plan administrator who fails or refuses to provide the required notice. The Act specifically requires the Secretary of Labor to provide regulatory guidance to the public with regard to new section 101(i) and establishes deadlines for the issuance of such guidance.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The Act requires the Secretary to issue regulatory guidance by October 13, 2002, and a model notice by January 1, 2003. Section 505 of ERISA authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations clarifying the provisions of title I of ERISA.
Alternatives:
The Department will develop regulatory alternatives after determining the scope and nature of the regulatory guidance needed by the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Determinations on the anticipated costs and benefits will be developed once determinations have been made with regard to the alternatives to be developed.
Risks:
Failure to provide the regulatory guidance mandated by the Act would contravene the provisions of law. Moreover, failure to issue such guidance would increase the potential risks of loss to plan participants and beneficiaries, and deprive plan administrators of information they need to enable them to comply with the new notice requirements.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Interim Final Rule | 10/21/02 | 67 FR 64765 |
| Interim Final Rule Comment Period End | 11/20/02 | |
| Interim Final Rule Effective | 01/26/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Federalism:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
Louis J. Camagna
Department of Labor
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
200 Constitution Avenue NW
Rm N5669
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8500
RIN:
1210-AA90
92. ¤ BLACKOUT NOTICE CIVIL PENALTY
Agency:
DOL—PWBA
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
PL 107-204; 29 USC 1135; 29 USC 1021(b)(1)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 2560
Legal Deadline:
Final, Statutory, October 13, 2002.
Abstract:
These regulations will provide guidance with respect to the requirement that plan administrators furnish advance notice of blackout periods affecting individual account plans pursuant to section 101(i) of ERISA, as added by section 306 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as the related civil penalty provisions.
Statement of Need:
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act), amended ERISA by adding a new section 101(i), which requires plan administrators to notify individual account plan participants in advance of any period during which their ability to give investment directions will be suspended. The Act also added a new section 502(c)(7) to ERISA authorizing the Secretary of Labor to assess civil penalties against a plan administrator who fails or refuses to provide the required notice. The Act specifically requires the Secretary of Labor to provide regulatory guidance to the public with regard to new section 101(i) and establishes deadlines for the issuance of such guidance.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The Act requires the Secretary to issue regulatory guidance by October 13, 2002, and a model notice by January 1, 2003. Section 505 of ERISA authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations clarifying the provisions of title I of ERISA.
Alternatives:
The Department will develop regulatory alternatives after determining the scope and nature of the regulatory guidance needed by the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Determinations on the anticipated costs and benefits will be developed once determinations have been made with regard to the alternatives to be developed.
Risks:
Failure to provide the regulatory guidance mandated by the Act would contravene the provisions of law. Moreover, failure to issue such guidance would increase the potential risks of loss to plan participants and beneficiaries, and deprive plan administrators of information they need to enable them to comply with the new notice requirements.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Interim Final Rule | 10/21/02 | 67 FR 64774 |
| Interim Final Rule Comment Period End | 11/20/02 | |
| Interim Final Rule Effective | 01/26/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Federalism:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
John J. Canary
Department of Labor
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
Room N5669
200 Constitution Avenue NW
FP Building
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8500
RIN:
1210-AA91
93. ¤ DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER EXPOSURE OF UNDERGROUND METAL AND NONMETAL MINERS
Agency:
DOL—Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
30 USC 811
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
30 CFR 57
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
On January 19, 2001, MSHA published a final rule addressing diesel particulate matter (DPM) exposure of underground metal and nonmetal miners. The final rule established new health standards for underground metal and nonmetal mines that use equipment powered by diesel engines. The rule establishes an interim concentration limit of 400 micrograms of total carbon per cubic meter of air that became applicable July 20, 2002, and a final concentration limit of 160 micrograms to become applicable after January 19, 2006. This rule has been legally challenged and settlement negotiations with the litigants have resulted in further regulatory action on several requirements in the January 19, 2001 final rule. Several of the actions have been completed. This new rulemaking will address the remaining issues. MSHA issued an ANPRM to obtain additional information and to develop a proposed rule thereafter.
Statement of Need:
Several entities legally challenged the January 19, 2001 final rule. As a result of partial settlement with the litigants, MSHA published two documents in the Federal Register on July 5, 2001. One document delayed the effective date of 57.5066(b) regarding the evidence and the tagging provisions of the maintenance standards; clarified the effective dates of certain provisions of the final rule; and gave correction amendments.
The second document was a proposed rule to clarify 57.5066(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the maintenance standards and to add a new paragraph (b)(3) to 57.5067 regarding the transfer of existing diesel equipment from one underground mine to another underground mine. The final rule on these issues was published February 27, 2002, and became effective March 29, 2002.
Also as part of the settlement agreement, MSHA agreed to conduct joint sampling with industry and labor at 31 underground mines to determine existing concentration levels of DPM; assess the performance of the SKC sampler and the NIOSH Analytical Method 5040; assess the feasibility of achieving compliance with the standard's concentration limit at the 31 mines; and, to assess the impact of interferences on the sample in the metal and nonmetal underground mining environment before the limits established in the final rule became effective. Sampling and date analyses are completed and the final report is being developed.
MSHA also agreed to reenter rulemaking on several other provisions. The following provisions will constitute the basis for this new rulemaking:
57.5060(a) and (b) - changing the diesel particulate matter surrogate from total carbon to elemental carbon for both the interim and final concentration limits;
57.5060(d) - permitting miners to work in areas where diesel particulate matter exceeds the applicable concentration limit;
57.5060(e) - prohibiting the use of personal protective equipment to comply with the concentration limits;
57.5060(f) - prohibiting the use of administrative controls to comply with the concentration limits;
57.5061(b) - changing reference of total carbon to elemental carbon;
57.5061(c) - deleting reference to "area" and "occupational" sampling for compliance;
57.5062 - addressing the diesel particulate matter control plan.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Promulgation of these regulations is authorized by section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.
Alternatives:
This rulemaking action is a result of the parties' settlement negotiations. This action will not decrease protection for miners.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
MSHA will develop a preliminary economic analysis to accompany the proposed rule.
Risks:
Several epidemiological studies have found that exposure to diesel exhaust presents potential health risk to workers. These potential adverse health effects range from headaches and nausea to respiratory disease and cancer. In the confined space of the underground mine environment, occupational exposure to diesel exhaust may present a greater hazard due to ventilation limitations and the presence of other airborne contaminants, such as toxic mine dusts or mine gases. We believe that the health evidence forms a reasonable basis for reducing miners' exposure to diesel particulate matter. Proceeding with rulemaking on the provisions discussed above, will reduce miners exposure to DPM.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| ANPRM | 09/25/02 | 67 FR 60199 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 11/25/02 | |
| NPRM | 02/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Marvin W. Nichols, Jr.
Director, Office of Standards
Department of Labor
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Room 2352
1100 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209-3939
Phone: 202 693-9457
Fax: 202 693-9441
Email: nichols-marvin@msha.gov
RIN:
1219-AB29
94. VERIFICATION OF UNDERGROUND COAL MINE OPERATORS' DUST CONTROL PLANS AND COMPLIANCE SAMPLING FOR RESPIRABLE DUST
Agency:
DOL—MSHA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
30 USC 811
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
30 CFR 70; 30 CFR 75; 30 CFR 90
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Our current regulations require that all underground coal mine operators develop and follow a mine ventilation plan for each mechanized mining unit that we approve. However, we do not have a requirement that provides for verification of each plan's effectiveness under typical mining conditions. Consequently, plans may be implemented by mine operators that could be inadequate to control respirable dust. The proposed rule provides for MSHA to verify the effectiveness of mine ventilation plans to control respirable dust under typical mining conditions. For longwall mine operators, we proposed to permit the limited use of either approved loose-fitting powered air purifying respirators (PAPRs) or verifiable administrative controls as a supplemental means of compliance if we have determined that further reduction in respirable dust levels cannot be achieved using all feasible engineering controls. Furthermore, MSHA proposed to assume responsibility for all compliance sampling for respirable dust in underground coal mines as required under 30 CFR parts 70 and 90. However, given significant public comments, MSHA will repropose this rule.
Statement of Need:
Respirable coal mine dust levels in this country are significantly lower than they were two decades ago. Despite this progress, there continues to be concern about the respirable coal mine dust sampling program and its effectiveness in maintaining exposure levels in mines at or below the applicable standard. Our regulations require that all underground coal mine operators develop and follow a mine ventilation plan approved by us. The dust control portion of the mine ventilation plan is the key element of an operator's strategy to control respirable dust in the work environment. Although such plans are required to be designed to control respirable dust, there is no current requirement that provides for verification of each proposed plan's effectiveness under typical mining conditions. Consequently, plans may be implemented that may be inadequate to control respirable dust. Therefore, we proposed to revoke existing operator respirable dust sampling and to implement new regulations that would require each underground coal mine operator to have a verified ventilation plan. MSHA would verify the effectiveness of the mine ventilation plan for each mechanized mining unit in controlling respirable dust under typical mining conditions.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Promulgation of these regulations is authorized by section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.
Alternatives:
In developing the proposed rule, we considered alternatives related to typical production levels, the use of appropriate dust control strategies, use of supplemental controls for mining entities other than longwalls, and the level of protection of loose-fitting powered air purifying respirators (PAPRS) in underground coal mines.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Benefits sought are reduced dust levels over a miner's working lifetime by the elimination of overexposures to respirable coal mine dust on each and every production shift. Additional benefits include reduced health care costs and disability and black lung benefit payments. There would be a cost savings for mine operators when MSHA completely takes over compliance and abatement sampling for respirable dust. We developed cost estimates and made them available for public review.
Risks:
Respirable coal mine dust is one of the most serious occupational hazards in the mining industry. Occupational exposure to excessive levels of respirable coal mine dust can cause black lung and silicosis, which are potentially disabling and can cause death. We are pursuing both regulatory and non-regulatory actions to eliminate these diseases through the control of coal mine respirable dust levels in mines and the reduction of miners' exposure.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 07/07/00 | 65 FR 42122 |
| Notice of Hearings; Close of Record | 07/07/00 | 65 FR 42186 |
| Extension of Comment Period; Close | 09/08/00 | 65 FR 49215 |
| NPRM | 02/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
This rulemaking is related to RIN 1219-AB18 (Determination of Concentration of Respirable Coal Mine Dust).
Agency Contact:
Marvin W. Nichols Jr.
Director, Office of Standards
Department of Labor
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Room 2352
1100 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 202 693-9457
Fax: 202 693-9441
Email: nichols-marvin@msha.gov
RIN:
1219-AB14
95. DETERMINATION OF CONCENTRATION OF RESPIRABLE COAL MINE DUST
Agency:
DOL—MSHA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
30 USC 811
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
30 CFR 72
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration jointly proposed that a single, full-shift measurement (single sample) will accurately represent the atmospheric condition to which a miner is exposed. The proposed rule addresses the U.S. Court of Appeals' concerns raised in National Mining Association v. Secretary of Labor, 153 3d 1264 (11th Cir. 1998). MSHA is supllmenting the record with additional data and will reopen the record for comments.
Statement of Need:
Respirable coal mine dust levels in this country are significantly lower than they were over two decades ago. Despite this progress, there continues to be concern about our current sampling programs' ability to accurately measure and maintain respirable coal mine dust exposure at or below the applicable standard on each shift. For as long as miners have taken coal from the ground, many have suffered respiratory problems due to their occupational exposures to respirable coal mine dust. These respiratory problems affect the current workforce and range from mild impairment of respiratory function to more severe diseases, such as silicosis and pulmonary massive fibrosis. For some miners, the impairment of their respiratory systems is so severe, they die prematurely. Since there is a clear relationship between a miner's cumulative exposure to respirable coal mine dust and the severity of the resulting respiratory conditions, it is imperative that each miner's exposure not exceed the applicable standard on each and every shift.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Promulgation of this regulation is authorized by section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.
Alternatives:
The requirements of this rule (single sample) will work in tandem with those of the proposed rule (RIN 1219-AB14) in which MSHA proposed to verify the effectiveness of ventilation plans as well as conduct all compliance sampling in underground coal mines. However, given significant public comments, MSHA will repropose RIN 1219-AB14 - Verification of Underground Coal Mine Operators' Dust Control Plans and Compliance Sampling for Respirable Dust.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Benefits sought are reduced dust levels over a miner's working lifetime by the elimination of overexposures to respirable coal mine dust on each and every production shift. Additional benefits include reduced health care costs and disability and black lung benefit payments.
Risks:
Respirable coal mine dust is one of the most serious occupational hazards in the mining industry. Occupational exposure to excessive levels of respirable coal mine dust can cause workers' pneumoconiosis and silicosis, which are potentially disabling and can cause death. We are pursuing both regulatory and nonregulatory actions to eliminate these diseases through the control of coal mine respirable dust levels in mines and reduction of miners' exposure.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 07/07/00 | 65 FR 42068 |
| Notice of Hearings; Close of Record | 07/07/00 | 65 FR 42185 |
| Extension of Comment Period; Close | 09/08/00 | 65 FR 49215 |
| Reopen Record for Comments | 02/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
This rulemaking is related to RIN 1219-AB14 (Verification of Underground Coal Mine Operators' Dust Control Plans and Compliance Sampling for Respirable Dust).
Agency Contact:
Marvin W. Nichols Jr.
Director, Office of Standards
Department of Labor
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Room 2352
1100 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 202 693-9457
Fax: 202 693-9441
Email: nichols-marvin@msha.gov
RIN:
1219-AB18
Agency:
DOL—MSHA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
30 USC 811; 30 USC 813
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
30 CFR 56; 30 CFR 57; 30 CFR 71
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
MSHA's permissible exposure limit (PEL) for asbestos applies to surface (30 CFR part 56) and underground (30 CFR part 57) metal and nonmetal mines and to surface coal mines and surface areas of underground coal mines (30 CFR part 71) and is over 20 years old. Current scientific data indicate that this existing PEL is not adequate to protect miners' health. MSHA is considering rulemaking to lower the PEL in order to reduce the risk of miners developing asbestos-induced occupational disease. A recent report by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) recommended that MSHA lower its existing permissible exposure limit for asbestos to a more protective level, and address take-home contamination from asbestos. It also recommended that MSHA use Transmission Electron Microscopy to analyze fiber samples that may contain asbestos.
Statement of Need:
Current scientific data indicate that the existing asbestos PEL is not protective of miners' health. MSHA's asbestos regulations date to 1967 and are based on the Bureau of Mines (MSHA's predecessor) standard of 5 mppcf (million particles per cubic foot of air). In 1969, the Bureau proposed a 2 mppcf and 12 fibers/ml standard. This standard was promulgated in 1969. In 1970, the Bureau proposed to lower the standard to 5 fibers/ml, which was promulgated in 1974. MSHA issued its current standard of 2 fibers/ml at the end of 1978 for metal and nonmetal mining (43 FR 54064). Since enactment of the Mine Act, MSHA has conducted regular inspections at both surface and underground operations at metal and nonmetal mines. During these inspections, MSHA routinely takes samples, which are analyzed for compliance with its standard.
Other Federal agencies have addressed this issue by lowering their PEL for asbestos. For example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, working in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency, enacted a revised asbestos standard in 1994 that lowered the permissible exposure limit and the excursion limit to an eight (8) hour time-weighted average limit of 0.1 fiber per cubic centimeter of air and to 1.0 fiber per cubic centimeter of air (1 f/cc) as averaged over a sampling period of thirty (30) minutes. These lowered limits reflected increased asbestos-related disease risk to asbestos-exposed workers.
Alternatives:
The Agency has increased sampling efforts in an attempt to determine current miners' exposure levels to asbestos, including taking samples at all existing vermiculite, taconite, talc, and other mines to determine whether asbestos is present and at what levels. Since the spring of 2000, MSHA has taken almost 900 samples at more than 40 operations employing more than 4,000 miners. During those sampling events, the MSHA staff also discussed with the miners and mine operators the potential hazards of asbestos and the types of preventive measures that could be implemented to reduce exposures. The course of action MSHA takes in addressing asbestos hazards to miners will, in part, be based on these sampling results.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
MSHA will develop a preliminary economic analysis to accompany any proposed rule that may be developed.
Risks:
There is concern that miners could be exposed to the hazards of asbestos during mine operations where the ore body contains asbestos. There is also potential for exposure at facilities in which installed asbestos-containing material is present. Overexposure to asbestos causes mesothelioma and other forms of cancers, such as cancers of the digestive system, as well as asbestosis.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| ANPRM | 03/29/02 | 67 FR 15134 |
| Notice of Public Meetings | 03/29/02 | |
| Notice of Change to Public Meetings | 04/18/02 | 67 FR 19140 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 06/27/02 | |
| NPRM | 09/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
The Office of the Inspector General's "Evaluation of MSHA's Handling of Inspections at the W.R. Grace & Company Mine in Libby, Montana," was issued in March 2001.
Agency Contact:
Marvin W. Nichols Jr.
Director, Office of Standards
Department of Labor
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Room 2352
1100 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 202 693-9457
Fax: 202 693-9441
Email: nichols-marvin@msha.gov
RIN:
1219-AB24
97. ASSIGNED PROTECTION FACTORS: AMENDMENTS TO THE FINAL RULE ON RESPIRATORY PROTECTION
Agency:
DOL—Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
29 USC 655(b); 29 USC 657
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 1910.134
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
In January 1998, OSHA published the final Respiratory Protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134), except for reserved provisions on assigned protection factors (APFs) and maximum use concentrations (MUCs). APFs are numbers that describe the effectiveness of the various classes of respirators in reducing employee exposure to airborne contaminants (including particulates, gases, vapors, biological agents, etc.). Employers, employees, and safety and health professionals use APFs to determine the type of respirator to protect the health of employees in various hazardous environments. Maximum use concentrations establish the maximum airborne concentration of a contaminant in which a respirator with a given APF may be used.
Currently, OSHA relies on the APFs developed by NIOSH in the 1980s unless OSHA has assigned a different APF in a substance-specific health standard. However, many employers follow the more recent APFs published in the industry consensus standard, ANSI Z88.2-1992. For some classes of respirators, the NIOSH and ANSI APFs vary greatly.
When OSHA published the final Respiratory Protection standard in 1998, it reserved for later rulemaking those provisions of the standard dealing with APFs and MUCs. This rulemaking action will complete the 1998 standard, reduce compliance confusion among employers, and provide employees with consistent and appropriate respiratory protection.
Statement of Need:
About 5 million employees wear respirators as part of their regular job duties. Due to inconsistencies between the APFs found in the current industry consensus standard (ANSI Z88.2-1992) and in the NIOSH Respirator Decision Logic, employers, employees, and safety and health professionals are often uncertain about what respirator to select to provide protection against hazardous air contaminants. Several industry and professional groups have asked OSHA to proceed with this rulemaking to resolve these inconsistencies and provide reliable protection of employees' health in cases where respirators must be worn.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis for this proposed rule is the determination that assigned protection factors and maximum use concentrations are necessary to complete the final Respiratory Protection standard and provide the full protection of that standard.
Alternatives:
OSHA has considered allowing the current situation to continue, in which OSHA generally enforces NIOSH APFs but many employers follow the more recent consensus standard APFs. However, allowing the continuation of this situation results in inconsistent enforcement, lack of guidance for employers, and the potential for inadequate employee protection.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The scope of the proposed APF table is still under development, and estimates of the costs and benefits have not yet been completed.
Risks:
The preamble to the final Respiratory Protection rule (63 FR 1270, Jan. 8, 1998) discusses the significance of the risks potentially associated with the use of respiratory protection. No independent finding of significant risk will be made for the APF rulemaking, since it only addresses a single provision of the larger rule.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| ANPRM | 05/14/82 | 47 FR 20803 |
| ANPRM Comment Period End | 09/13/82 | |
| NPRM | 11/15/94 | 59 FR 58884 |
| Final Rule | 01/08/98 | 63 FR 1152 |
| Final Rule Effective | 04/08/98 | |
| NPRM | 02/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
State, Local, Tribal, Federal
Agency Contact:
Steven F. Witt
Director, Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N3605
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2222
Fax: 202 693-1663
RIN:
1218-AA05
98. FIRE PROTECTION IN SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT (PART 1915, SUBPART P) (SHIPYARDS: FIRE SAFETY)
Agency:
DOL—OSHA
Priority:
Other Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
29 USC 655
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 1915, subpart P
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The rule will update and revise an important but outdated part of OSHA's shipyard rules. The original rule was adopted by OSHA in 1971 and has remained unchanged since then. A negotiated rulemaking committee was convened on October 15, 1996. Members of the committee included: OSHA, State government, Federal agency, small and large shipyard employers, and maritime and firefighter union representatives. The committee completed work in February 2002, and recommended proposal requirements to OSHA. The Agency has developed an NPRM based on their recommendations.
Statement of Need:
Fires in the shipyard environment may cause death and serious injuries in this 100,000-employee workforce. Updating OSHA's outdated shipyard requirements for fire extinguishers, sprinkler systems, detection systems, alarm systems, and fire brigades will facilitate compliance by employers and employees and reduce these fire-related injuries and fatalities.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis for this proposed rule is a preliminary determination that an unacceptable risk of fire-related injuries and fatalities exists in the shipyard industry.
Alternatives:
OSHA has considered but rejected the alternative of allowing the existing rule to remain in place, because the Agency believes that doing so would contribute to the unacceptable number of fire-related accidents occurring in shipyards every year.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Detailed cost and benefits estimates are being prepared for the NPRM.
Risks:
A risk analysis is incldued in the NPRM.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 12/00/02 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
Steven F. Witt
Director, Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N3605
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2222
Fax: 202 693-1663
RIN:
1218-AB51
99. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO CRYSTALLINE SILICA
Agency:
DOL—OSHA
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
29 USC 655(b); 29 USC 657
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 1910; 29 CFR 1915; 29 CFR 1917; 29 CFR 1918; 29 CFR 1926
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Crystalline silica is a significant component of the earth's crust, and many workers in a wide range of industries are exposed to it, usually in the form of respirable quartz or, less frequently, cristobalite. Chronic silicosis is a uniquely occupational disease resulting from exposure of employees over long periods of time (10 years or more). Exposure to high levels of respirable crystalline silica causes acute or accelerated forms of silicosis that are ultimately fatal. The current OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) for general industry is based on a formula recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) in 1971 [PEL=10mg/cubic meter/(%silica + 2), as respirable dust]. The current PEL for construction and maritime (derived from ACGIH's 1962 Threshold Limit Value) is based on particle counting technology, which is considered obsolete. NIOSH and ACGIH recommend a 50ug/m3 exposure limit for respirable crystalline silica.
Both industry and worker groups have recognized that a comprehensive standard for crystalline silica is needed to provide for exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and worker training. The American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) recently published a final recommended standard to address the hazards of crystalline silica. The Building Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO has also developed a recommended comprehensive program standard. These standards include provisions for methods of compliance, exposure monitoring, training, and medical surveillance.
In developing a proposed standard, OSHA is currently considering several options ranging from proposing comprehensive standards simultaneously for general industry, construction, and maritime, to focusing the proposal on one or more specific issues, such as modernizing the construction and maritime PELs or standardizing sampling and employee exposures. OSHA is continuing to coordinate closely with the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in collecting and developing information for a proposed standard.
Statement of Need:
Over 2 million workers are exposed to crystalline silica dust in general industry, construction and maritime industries. Industries that could be particularly affected by a standard for crystalline silica include: foundries, industries that have abrasive blasting operation, paint manufacture, glass and concrete product manufacture, brick making, china and pottery manufacture, manufacture of plumbing fixtures, and many construction activities including highway repair, masonry, concrete work, rock drilling, and tuckpointing. The seriousness of the health hazards associated with silica exposure is demonstrated by the fatalities and disabling illnesses that continue to occur. Between 1990 and 1996, 200 to 300 deaths per year are known to have occurred where silicosis was identified on death certificates as an underlying or contributing cause. It is likely that many more cases have occurred where silicosis went undetected. In addition, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has designated crystalline silica as a known human carcinogen. Exposure to crystalline silica has also been associated with an increased risk of developing tuberculosis and other nonmalignant respiratory diseases. Exposure studies and OSHA enforcement data indicate that some workers continue to be exposed to levels of crystalline silica far in excess of current exposure limits. Congress has recently included compensation of silicosis victims on Federal nuclear testing sites in the Energy Employees' Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. There is a particular need for the Agency to modernize its exposure limits for construction and maritime, and to address some specific issues that will need to be resolved to propose a comprehensive standard.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis for the proposed rule is a preliminary determination that workers are exposed to a significant risk of silicosis and other serious disease and that rulemaking is needed to substantially reduce the risk. In addition, the proposed rulemaking will recognize that the PELs for construction and maritime are outdated and need to be revised to reflect current sampling and analytical technologies.
Alternatives:
Over the past several years, the Agency has attempted to address this problem through a variety of nonregulatory approaches, including initiation of a Special Emphasis Program on silica in October 1997, sponsorship with NIOSH and MSHA of the National Conference to Eliminate Silicosis, and dissemination of guidance information on its Web site. OSHA has determined that rulemaking is a necessary step to ensure that workers are protected from the hazards of crystalline silica. The Agency is currently evaluating several options for the scope of the rulemaking.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The scope of the proposed rulemaking is still under development, and estimates of the costs and benefits have not yet been developed.
Risks:
A detailed risk analysis has not yet been completed for this rule.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| Initiate SBREFA Process or Initiate | 06/00/03 | |
| NPRM | 11/00/03 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Agency Contact:
Steven F. Witt
Director, Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N3605
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2222
Fax: 202 693-1663
RIN:
1218-AB70
100. STANDARDS IMPROVEMENT (MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES) FOR GENERAL INDUSTRY, MARINE TERMINALS, AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (PHASE II)
Agency:
DOL—OSHA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
29 USC 655(b)
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 1910, subpart Z; 29 CFR 1910.1001 to 1910.1052; 29 CFR 1910.142; 29 CFR 1910.178; 29 CFR 1910.219; 29 CFR 1910.261; 29 CFR 1910.265; 29 CFR 1910.410; 29 CFR 1917.92; 29 CFR 1926.1101; 29 CFR 1926.1127; 29 CFR 1926.1129; 29 CFR 1926.60; 29 CFR 1926.62
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is proposing to remove or revise provisions in its health standards that are out of date, duplicative, unnecessary, or inconsistent. The Agency is proposing these changes to reduce the burden imposed on the regulated community by these requirements. In this document, substantive changes are proposed for standards that will revise or eliminate duplicative, inconsistent, or unnecessary regulatory requirements without diminishing employee protections. Phase I of this Standards Improvement process was completed in June 1998 (63 FR 33450). OSHA plans to initiate Phase III of this project at a future date to address problems in various safety standards.
Statement of Need:
Some of OSHA's standards are out of date, duplicative, unnecessary, or inconsistent. The Agency needs to periodically review its standards and make needed corrections. This effort results in standards that are easier for employers and employees to follow and comply with, and thus enhances compliance and worker protection.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis for the proposed rule is a preliminary finding that the OSHA standards need to be updated to bring them up to date, reduce inconsistency, and remove unneeded provisions.
Alternatives:
OSHA has considered updating each standard as problems are discovered, but has determined that it is better to make such changes to groups of standards so it is easier for the public to comment on like standards. OSHA has also considered the inclusion of safety standards that need to be updated. However, the Agency has decided to pursue a separate rulemaking for safety issues because the standards to be updated are of interest to different stakeholders.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
This revision of OSHA's standards is a deregulatory action. It will reduce employers' compliance obligations.
Risks:
The project does not address specific risks, but is intended to improve OSHA's standards by bringing them up do date and deleting unneeded provisions. The anticipated changes will have no negative effects on worker safety and health.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 10/31/02 | 67 FR 66493 |
| NPRM Comment Period End | 12/20/02 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Steven F. Witt
Director, Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N3605
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2222
Fax: 202 693-1663
RIN:
1218-AB81
101. UPDATE AND REVISION OF THE EXIT ROUTES STANDARD
Agency:
DOL—OSHA
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
29 USC 655(b); 5 USC 353
CFR Citation: (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
29 CFR 1910.35; 29 CFR 1910.36; 29 CFR 1910.37; 29 CFR 1910.38
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Many Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards were adopted under section 6(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act; 29 U.S.C. 655(a)). This section of the OSH Act authorized the Agency, in its first 2 years of existence, to adopt national consensus standards without prior notice and comment. The versions of the consensus standards OSHA adopted are now typically well over 30 years old and have been superseded by newer ones. In addition, many of these old standards were written in technical jargon and were hard for many employers and employees to understand.
To address these problems, OSHA is revising OSHA's exit routes (also known as means of egress) standard. The revisions rewrite the standard in simple, easy-to-understand language that will be easier for employers and employees to follow.
Statement of Need:
The standard being revised in this initiative is one of OSHA's oldest and most difficult to understand. The Agency has identified the exit routes standard as a standard in need of revision because it is out of date and unnecessarily complex, and stakeholders have recommended that the standard be updated quickly. OSHA also believes that revising the standard will lead to better voluntary compliance and fewer disputes about violations. With OSHA's limited resources, any effort that can substantially increase opportunities for compliance without sacrificing employee safety and health protection will have long-term benefits.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis for the final rule is that by making these OSHA standards easier to understand and comply with, the Agency will increase compliance and reduce work-related injuries and deaths.
Alternatives:
The alternative considered — leaving the outdated standard on the books — has been rejected because doing so would not encourage compliance or enhance safety.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The final standard for exit routes will have no economic impacts because this revision will not increase employers' obligations or reduce employee protections.
Risks:
Employees can be injured or killed if they are not able to exit an area safely when a fire or other emergency occurs.
| Action | Date | FR Cite |
| NPRM | 09/10/96 | 61 FR 47712 |
| Public Hearing | 04/29/97 | 62 FR 9402 |
| Final Rule | 12/00/02 |
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Agency Contact:
Steven F. Witt
Director, Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N3605
200 Constitution Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-2222
Fax: 202 693-1663
RIN:
1218-AB82