provisions. In particular, [the Panel    the descriptions of accidents.
 recommends that] OSHA * * * focus        For each accident reviewed,
 attention on the benefits associated     OSHA analyzed the detailed
 with the provisions on flame-            description of the accident,
 resistant] apparel, training, host/      along with the citations
 contractor responsibilities, and fall    issued, the type of injuries
 protection.                              incurred, and the causes
                                          associated with the accident
                                          to estimate the likelihood
                                          that the accident was
                                          preventable under, first, the
                                          existing applicable standards,
                                          and second, the final rule.
                                          Based on these analyses,
                                          CONSAD found that full
                                          compliance with the existing
                                          standards would prevent 52.9
                                          percent of the injuries and
                                          fatalities; compliance with
                                          the final rule, however, would
                                          prevent 79.8 percent of the
                                          relevant injuries and
                                          fatalities. Compared to the
                                          existing standards, the final
                                          standard increases safety by
                                          preventing an additional 20
                                          fatalities and 119 injuries
                                          annually.
                                         In addition, the final rule
                                          improves safety by clarifying
                                          and updating the existing
                                          standards to reflect modern
                                          technologies, work practices,
                                          and terminology and by making
                                          the standards consistent with
                                          current consensus standards
                                          and other related standards
                                          and documents. By facilitating
                                          the understanding of, and
                                          compliance with, these
                                          important safety standards,
                                          the final rule increases
                                          protection of employees while
                                          reducing uncertainty,
                                          confusion, and compliance
                                          burdens on employers.

                                         Section V, Summary and
                                          Explanation of the Final Rule,
                                          earlier in this preamble,
                                          includes explanations of the
                                          need for, and the expected
                                          benefits associated with,
                                          specific provisions of the
                                          final rule. In particular, see
                                          the summary and explanation of
                                          final Sec.  Sec.   1926.950(c)
                                          (host-contractor
                                          responsibilities), 1926.954(b)
                                          (fall protection), and
                                          1926.960(g) (flame-resistant
                                          clothing) for a discussion of
                                          the need for, and a
                                          qualitative explanation of,
                                          the benefits of these
                                          provisions.
8. There were no comments from the SERs  As discussed under the heading
 on OSHA's estimates [in the draft        ``Costs of Compliance,''
 analysis provided to the SERs] of the    earlier in this section of the
 number and type of small entities        preamble, OSHA's FEA,
 affected by the proposal. However,       including its estimates of
 some [SERs] pointed out that there may   baseline activities and its
 be some small entities that engage in    cost estimates, reflect the
 only construction related activities.    possible existence of some
 The Panel recommends that OSHA's         firms not currently covered by
 estimates of current baseline            existing Sec.   1910.269 and
 activities and OSHA's cost estimates     that do not comply with these
 reflect such firms.                      provisions when performing
                                          construction work on electric
                                          power generation,
                                          transmission, or distribution
                                          installations.
9. Most SERs were uncertain about how    OSHA included appendices
 to comply with performance oriented      containing guidelines on the
 provisions of the proposal, and          inspection of work-positioning
 further, that additional expenses        equipment to assist employers
 might be required to be confident that   in complying with the
 they were in compliance with such        requirement to conduct such
 provisions. The Panel recommends that    inspections described in Sec.
 OSHA study and address these issues      Sec.   1910.269(g)(2)(iv)(A)
 and consider the use of guidance         and 1926.954(b)(3)(i). The
 material (e.g. non-mandatory             final rule also includes
 appendices) to describe specific ways    appendices on clothing in Sec.
 of meeting the standard, which will        1910.269 and Subpart V of
 help small employers comply, without     Part 1926. These appendices
 making the standard more prescriptive.   should assist employers to
                                          comply with the clothing
                                          provisions in Sec.  Sec.
                                          1910.269(l)(8) and
                                          1926.960(g).
                                         The rule also includes many
                                          references to consensus
                                          standards that contain
                                          information that can assist
                                          employers to comply with
                                          various provisions of the
                                          final rule. For example, the
                                          note to Sec.   1926.957(b)
                                          directs employers to the
                                          Institute of Electrical and
                                          Electronics Engineers' IEEE
                                          Guide for Maintenance Methods
                                          on Energized Power Lines, IEEE
                                          Std 516-2009 for guidance on
                                          the examination, cleaning,
                                          repairing, and in-service
                                          testing of live-line tools to
                                          help employers comply with
                                          that provision in the OSHA
                                          standards. Lastly, Appendix G
                                          to Sec.   1910.269 and
                                          Appendix G to Subpart V of
                                          Part 1926 contain lists of
                                          reference documents that
                                          employers can access for help
                                          in complying with the final
                                          rule.
                                         The preamble and this analysis
                                          both contain additional
                                          descriptions of what OSHA
                                          considers necessary and
                                          sufficient for purposes of
                                          achieving compliance with the
                                          requirements of the final
                                          rule.
10. Most SERs were highly critical of    OSHA modified the provisions on
 the host contractor provisions [in the   host-contractor
 draft proposal provided to the SERs]     responsibilities substantially
 and had trouble understanding what       from the requirements in the
 OSHA required. If these provisions are   draft proposal reviewed by the
 to be retained, the Panel recommends     SERs. The Agency believes that
 that they be revised. The Panel          the changes address the
 recommends that OSHA clarify what        concerns expressed by the
 constitutes adequate consideration of    SERs.
 contractor safety performance, clarify  The final rule does not contain
 what is meant by ``observation,''        requirements for the host
 clarify how the multi-employer           employer to consider a
 citation policy is related to the        contract employer's safety
 proposal, and clarify whether the        performance or for the host
 requirement to communicate hazards       employer to observe or
 does or does not represent a             supervise contract employers'
 requirement for the host employer to     work. In addition, the final
 conduct their own risk assessment. The   rule does not include the
 Panel also recommends that OSHA          proposed requirement that host
 examine the extent to which state        employers report observed
 contractor licensing could make the      contract-employer-related
 host contractor provisions in the        violations to the contract
 proposal unnecessary.                    employer.
                                         The discussion of final Sec.
                                          1926.950(c), in Section V,
                                          Summary and Explanation of the
                                          Final Rule, earlier in this
                                          preamble, provides
                                          clarification of the purpose
                                          and application of the host-
                                          contractor requirements and
                                          their relationship to OSHA's
                                          multiemployer citation policy.
                                         The discussion of final Sec.
                                          1926.950(c)(1), in Section V,
                                          Summary and Explanation of the
                                          Final Rule, earlier in this
                                          preamble, makes it clear that
                                          the purpose of the
                                          requirements for host
                                          employers to provide
                                          information to contractors is
                                          to facilitate the contractors'
                                          efforts to perform their own
                                          assessments as required by the
                                          final rule.
                                         OSHA does not believe that
                                          State contractor-licensing
                                          requirements make the final
                                          host-contractor provisions
                                          unnecessary. Not all States
                                          require electric power
                                          generation, transmission, and
                                          distribution contractors to
                                          have a license. For example,
                                          Illinois and New York do not
                                          require licensing at the State
                                          level (see http://www.electric-find.com/license.htm).
                                          Additionally, States with such
                                          licensing requirements judge
                                          primarily the contractors'
                                          ability to install electric
                                          equipment in accordance with
                                          State or national installation
                                          codes, and not their ability
                                          to perform electric power
                                          generation, transmission, and
                                          distribution work safely.
11. Some SERs questioned the need for    OSHA considered these issues in
 flame-resistant clothing beyond the      the development of the final
 existing clothing provisions in [Sec.    clothing requirements, as
  ]1910.269. Some argued that there was   explained in the discussion of
 a trade-off between possible decreased   final Sec.   1926.960(g), in
 injuries from burns and heat stress      Section V, Summary and
 injuries as a result of using flame-     Explanation of the Final Rule,
 resistant clothing. The Panel            earlier in this preamble.
 recommends that OSHA consider and
 solicit comments on these issues.

12. Many SERs were uncertain whether     OSHA adopted requirements in
 [the draft proposal's] requirements      the final rule that provide
 for determining the need for flame-      guidance explaining ways an
 resistant clothing would allow the use   employer can comply with the
 of such methods as 1) ``worst case''     arc-flash protection
 analysis or 2) specifying minimum        requirements in Sec.  Sec.
 levels of protection for use when a      1910.269(l)(8) and
 system does not exceed certain limits.   1926.960(g). For example, the
 The Panel recommends that OSHA clarify   Agency included two notes and
 what methods are acceptable to meet      additional appendix material
 these requirements, and specify these    explaining how an employer can
 methods in such a way that small         calculate estimates of
 entities can be confident that they      available heat energy. For
 have met the requirements of the         additional information, see
 standards.                               the discussion of final Sec.
                                          1926.960(g) in Section V,
                                          Summary and Explanation of the
                                          Final Rule, earlier in this
                                          preamble.
13. OSHA[`s draft proposal included]     OSHA believes that the changes
 some changes to the training             this final rule makes to the
 provisions in [Sec.   ]1910.269,         training requirements in
 including dropping certification         existing Sec.   1910.269
 requirements and allowing training to    clarify the standard and
 vary with risk. OSHA stated that both    reduce burdens on employers.
 of these changes were designed to give   See the discussion of final
 the rules a greater performance          Sec.   1926.950(b), in Section
 orientation and to ease compliance.      V, Summary and Explanation of
 Some SERs felt that these changes        the Final Rule, earlier in
 might make compliance more complicated   this preamble, for additional
 by making it less clear what needs to    clarification on how to comply
 be done. The Panel recommends that       with the training requirements
 OSHA clarify the performance             in the final rule. OSHA did
 orientation of these [draft proposed]    not state that compliance with
 changes and consider explaining that     the training provisions in
 existing compliance methods would        existing Sec.   1910.269 will
 still be considered adequate under the   constitute compliance with the
 new rules. The Panel further             training provisions in the
 recommends that OSHA examine the         final rule because employers
 requirement [in existing Sec.            will need to develop and
 1910.269(a)(2)(vii)] that employees      provide additional training to
 demonstrate proficiency and provide      address the new and revised
 examples of how that can be              safety-related work-practice
 accomplished. The Panel also             requirements in the final
 recommends that OSHA consider the        rule. Thus, training that
 possibility that the proposed draft      complies with existing Sec.
 may introduce costs to small             1910.269 will not be
 businesses that are uncertain of how     sufficient under the final
 to comply with the new performance       rule.
 oriented training provisions.           Existing Sec.
                                          1910.269(a)(2)(vii) already
                                          requires employees to
                                          demonstrate proficiency in the
                                          work practices involved. OSHA
                                          believes that most employers
                                          are already complying with
                                          this requirement in various
                                          ways. For example, some
                                          employers have employees
                                          demonstrate proficiency in
                                          climbing after completing a
                                          pole-climbing class that
                                          includes climbing on practice
                                          poles as part of the
                                          curriculum. In addition, many
                                          employers use an
                                          apprenticeship program, in
                                          which journeyman line workers
                                          acting as crew leaders observe
                                          trainees over the course of
                                          the program. The trainees pass
                                          through the apprenticeship
                                          program by successfully
                                          completing each step,
                                          demonstrating proficiency in
                                          various tasks along the way,
                                          until the trainees reach the
                                          journeyman level.
                                         In addition to the guidance
                                          provided in the preamble and
                                          appendices on how to comply
                                          with the new training
                                          requirements, the Agency is
                                          planning to issue a Small
                                          Entity Compliance Guide
                                          covering these issues
                                          following publication of the
                                          standard.
14. Several SERS argued that the         OSHA clarified the purpose of
 [draft] proposal placed restrictions     the changes to the fall
 on the length of [a] lanyard and that    protection requirements in
 these restrictions were unworkable.      final Sec.   1926.954(b)(1)(i)
 The Panel recommends that OSHA clarify   and (b)(2) in the discussion
 the intent of the fall protection        of those provisions in Section
 provisions. Other SERs argued that       V, Summary and Explanation of
 fall fatalities from aerial lifts were   the Final Rule, earlier in
 either the result of catastrophic        this preamble. The Agency also
 failures in which case fall protection   clarified the requirements in
 would not have prevented the death, or   final Sec.
 the result of failure to use any form    1926.954(b)(3)(iii) to use
 of fall arrest or fall restraint. Some   fall protection equipment to
 SERs argued that some workers might      make it clear what each type
 find harnesses more awkward than belts   of fall protection system is
 and be less likely to wear them. The     and when it is acceptable. The
 Panel recommends that OSHA consider      discussion of final Sec.
 and solicit comment on these issues.     1926.954(b)(3)(iii), in
                                          Section V, Summary and
                                          Explanation of the Final Rule,
                                          earlier in this preamble,
                                          describes why the reasons
                                          provided by the SERs did not
                                          persuade the Agency to permit
                                          the use of body belts in a
                                          fall arrest system.
15. This rule was designed by OSHA to    OSHA does not believe that the
 eliminate confusing differences          provisions on host-contractor
 between the applicable construction      responsibilities duplicate or
 and general industry standards by        overlap the Agency's
 making the standards consistent.         multiemployer policy or create
 Several SERs felt this was a             employer-employee
 worthwhile goal. Some SERs felt that     relationships for FLSA or IRS
 the host contractor provisions of the    purposes. See the discussion
 rule could result in causing             of final Sec.   1926.950(c) in
 contractor employees to be considered    Section V, Summary and
 employees of the host employer under     Explanation of the Final Rule,
 the Fair Labor Standards Act and under   earlier in this preamble, for
 the Internal Revenue Service             a full discussion of these
 regulations. In addition, the SERs       issues.
 identified OSHA's multi-employer
 citation policy as duplicative and
 overlapping of the host contractor
 provisions in the proposal. The Panel
 recommends that, if this provision is
 retained, OSHA investigate this issue
 and clarify these provisions to assure
 that contractor employees do not
 become direct employees of the host
 employer as a result of complying with
 possible OSHA requirements.
16. Some SERs were unconvinced about     The Agency received no comments
 the need for revisions to the existing   on the regulatory alternative
 [Sec.   ]1910.269 standard in light of   of extending existing Sec.
 their potential to improve safety        1910.269, in its entirety, to
 beyond what compliance with the          construction without further
 requirements in existing [Sec.           modification. In any event,
 ]1910.269 would achieve. The Panel       the Agency finds that the
 recommends that OSHA consider and        additional changes to both
 solicit comment on the regulatory        Sec.   1910.269 and Subpart V
 alternative of extending the             will prevent a significant
 requirements of [Sec.   ]1910.269 to     number of fatalities and
 construction, without further            injuries each year.
 modification.

17. The Panel notes that [the draft      OSHA considered these options
 proposed host-contractor] provisions     and adopted several of them.
 were particularly troublesome for        See the discussion of final
 almost all SERs, and that as a result,   Sec.   1926.950(c) in Section
 OSHA should provide either some change   V, Summary and Explanation of
 or provide extensive clarification to    the Final Rule, earlier in
 these [draft proposed] provisions. The   this preamble, for additional
 Panel recommends that OSHA consider,     discussion of these
 analyze, and solicit comment on a        provisions.
 variety of alternatives to these
 [draft proposed] provisions,
 including:
    (1) Dropping all or some of these
     provisions.
    (2) Specifying in detail methods
     that would be considered adequate
     for purposes of compliance for
     those provisions retained..
    (3) Changing the provision for
     consideration of safety
     performance to indicate how
     employers can be sure they have
     complied with the provision..
    (4) Changing the provisions
     concerning observed violations by:
         Dropping the provision
         concerning observed violations
         entirely;
         Changing the provision
         concerning observed violations
         to clearly indicate that
         ``inspections'' are not
         required;
         Minimizing the amount
         of follow-up and
         responsibility placed on the
         host employer when a violation
         is observed;
         Requiring only that
         the contractor be notified of
         observed violations (no
         requirement for subsequent
         monitoring or evaluation);
         Changing the provision
         to require observation for the
         purpose of determining if the
         contractor is performing safe
         work practices, and requiring
         observed violations to be
         reported to the contractor (no
         requirement for subsequent
         monitoring or evaluation);
         Providing explicit
         language that line clearance
         tree trimmers are not covered
         by this provision;
         Specifying that only
         observations made by a
         ``safety professional'' or
         other individual qualified to
         identify hazards must be
         reported to the contractor.
    (5) Changing the provision for
     hazard communication to make clear
     that the host employer is not
     required to conduct his or her own
     hazard analysis, but only to
     communicate such hazards of which
     the host employer may be aware.
18. The Panel recommends that OSHA       OSHA considered the options
 consider and solicit comment on two      recommended by the Panel. The
 kinds of options with respect to flame-  Agency adopted the second
 resistant clothing. First, [the Panel    option suggested by the Panel.
 recommends that] OSHA consider the       Appendix E to Sec.   1910.269
 alternative of no further requirements   and Appendix E to Part 1926,
 beyond existing [Sec.   ]1910.269 for    Subpart V, contain tables that
 the use of flame-resistant clothing.     employers may use to estimate
Second, [the Panel recommends that,]      available heat energy.
 should the draft requirement be          Although these tables do not
 retained in some manner, OSHA * * *      cover every circumstance, they
 consider and solicit comment on one or   do address many exposure
 a combination of alternative means of    conditions found in overhead
 determining how much protection is       electric power transmission
 needed or required. These alternatives   and distribution work. Other
 should include:.                         assessment aids are available,
                                          and also listed in the two
                                          appendices, for other exposure
                                          conditions, including typical
                                          electric power generation
                                          exposures.
    (1) Allowing the employer to         OSHA did not incorporate any of
     estimate the exposure assuming       the other Panel-recommended
     that the distance from the           options into the final rule
     employee to the electric arc is      because the Agency either
     equal to the minimum approach        currently believes that they
     distance.                            are not sufficiently
    (2) Providing tables showing heat     protective or has insufficient
     energy for different exposure        information to incorporate
     conditions as an alternative         them. See the discussion of
     assessment method..                  final Sec.   1926.960(g), in
    (3) Specifying a minimum level of     Section V, Summary and
     protection for overhead line work    Explanation of the Final Rule,
     (for example, 10 cal/cm2) for use    earlier in this preamble, for
     when the system does not exceed      a discussion of the regulatory
     certain limits as an alternative     alternatives recommended by
     to hazard assessment..               rulemaking participants and
                                          considered by the Agency.
    (4) Allowing the employer to reduce
     protection when other factors
     interfere with the safe
     performance of the work (for
     example, severe heat stress) after
     the employer has considered
     alternative methods of performing
     the work, including the use of
     live-line tools and deenergizing
     the lines and equipment, and has
     found them to be unacceptable.
    (5) Allowing employers to base
     their assessments on a ``worst
     case analysis.''.
    (6) Requiring employers to use
     appropriate flame-retard[a]nt
     clothing without specifying any
     assessment method..

19. Some SERs were concerned that the    See OSHA's response to Panel
 revised training requirements            recommendation 13, earlier in
 [contained in the draft proposal]        this table, and the discussion
 complicated the question of              of final Sec.   1926.950(b),
 demonstrating that training had been     in Section V, Summary and
 provided, and that the [draft            Explanation of the Final Rule,
 proposed] requirement that training be   earlier in this preamble.
 related to the risk would require
 additional training, additional
 documentation, or both. The Panel
 recommends that OSHA consider making
 it clear that employers that follow
 the existing training provisions in
 [Sec.   ]1910.269 will be in
 compliance with the new rules, and
 that OSHA clarify alternative methods
 that would be considered acceptable
 for demonstrating adequacy of training
 and the relation of the training to
 risk.
20. In response to comment by some       OSHA is adopting only one new
 SERs, the Panel recommends that OSHA     requirement related to job
 consider and solicit comment on the      briefings. Final Sec.  Sec.
 issue of whether the additional job      1910.269(c)(1)(i) and
 briefing requirements [in the draft      1926.952(a)(1) require the
 proposal] are needed and how they can    employer to provide the
 be met in situations in which the        employee in charge of the job
 employee is working at a distant         with all available information
 location.                                that relates to the
                                          determination of existing
                                          characteristics and conditions
                                          that the crew must complete.
                                          For additional discussion of
                                          this provision and related
                                          comments, see the discussion
                                          of final Sec.   1926.952(a)(1)
                                          in Section V, Summary and
                                          Explanation of the Final Rule,
                                          earlier in this preamble.
                                         The Agency believes that many
                                          employers are already
                                          providing relevant information
                                          about a job when they assign
                                          that job to a crew of
                                          employees or to an employee
                                          working alone. OSHA
                                          anticipates that employers
                                          will pass along the required
                                          information when they assign
                                          jobs to employees. Where the
                                          employees are working has no
                                          effect on the employer's
                                          ability to communicate the
                                          information.
21. All of the affected SERs felt that   Over the course of the
 the provisions of the [draft proposal]   rulemaking, OSHA examined the
 with respect to fall restraint systems   issue of whether using fall
 would make it difficult for a person     restraint systems to protect
 using a fall restraint system to         employees working from aerial
 perform the necessary work. The SERs     lifts was practical and
 also raised the possibility of safety    explored with manufacturers
 problems associated with wearing a       the nonregulatory option of
 safety harness as opposed to a safety    improving fall protection
 belt, such as an increased likelihood    systems for use in aerial
 of the harness being snagged and as a    lifts. The final rule requires
 result the employee being either         that employers ensure that
 pulled into a wood chipper while on      employees use a fall restraint
 the ground or pulled out of the bucket   system or a personal fall
 when it is lowered. The Panel            arrest system when working
 recommends that OSHA consider and        from aerial lifts. The final
 solicit comment on the alternative of    rule also requires that
 making no changes to its existing fall   employers ensure that
 protection requirements. [The Panel      employees use a personal fall
 recommends that, i]f the provision is    arrest system, work-
 retained, OSHA should carefully          positioning equipment, or fall-
 examine the issue of whether the fall    restraint system, as
 restraint system requirements in the     appropriate, when working at
 draft make use of fall restraint         elevated locations more than
 systems unworkable in aerial lifts.      1.2 meters (4 feet) above the
 [The Panel recommends that] OSHA * * *   ground on poles, towers, or
 also consider the nonregulatory          similar structures if the
 alternative of working with aerial       employer does not provide
 device manufacturers and aerial device   other fall protection. See the
 users (for example, electric and         discussion of final Sec.
 telecommunications utilities, painting   1926.954(b)(3)(ii) and
 and electrical contractors, tree-        (b)(3)(iii) in Section V,
 trimming firms) in the development of    Summary and Explanation of the
 improved fall restraint systems that     Final Rule, earlier in this
 are more comfortable than existing       preamble, for a discussion of
 systems and maintain the appropriate     comments received on the
 degree of protection for employees.      regulatory alternatives.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* OSHA took the Panel recommendations listed in the table directly from
  the Panel's report (Ex. 0019). OSHA made editorial modifications, as
  necessary, for the purpose of clarity. Any modifications to the
  original recommendations are nonsubstantive and clearly indicated.

I. References

1. ``Analysis of CONSAD IMIS Accident Records, Inspection Detail,''
prepared by OSHA Directorate of Standards and Guidance, April 30,
2013.
2. Analysis of CONSAD Records.xls, Excel spreadsheet showing OSHA's
analysis of CONSAD accident data with one record per accident and
summary table, November 30, 2013.
3. Ashford, N.A., 2007. ``Workers' Compensation,'' in Environmental
and Occupational Medicine, Fourth Edition, W.N. Rom & S. Markowitz
(Eds.), Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, pp. 1712-1719.
4. Buckingham Manufacturing. 2010. Buckingham Linemen's Catalog. See
http://www.buckinghammfg.com (December 15, 2010 \574\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \574\ In these references, a date in parentheses indicates the
date on which ERG visited the pertinent Web site to retrieve pricing
information that OSHA used in this FEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. CONSAD. June 8, 2005. ``Revised Final Report. Analytical Support
and Data Gathering for a Preliminary Economic Analysis for Proposed
Standards for Work on Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and
Distribution Lines and Equipment (29 CFR 1910.269 and 29 CFR 1926--
Subpart V).'' Ex. 0080.
6. CONSAD. ``Summary of 1910.269 and Subpart V Accidents from the
IMIS Database, by State, 1992-2000.'' January 13, 2004.
7. Cress, S. 2010. Email between Stephen Cress, Kinectrics, and
Eastern Research Group. October 22, 2010.
8. Eastern Research Group, Inc. 2011. Memo to OSHA re Supporting
Analysis on Final Electric Power Generation Rule. March 6, 2012.
9. Excel spreadsheet showing calculation of breakeven rates taking
account of baseline compliance.
10. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 2009. Form No. 1: Annual
Report of Major Electric Utility. See http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms.asp#1.
11. Grainger. 2010a. SALISBURY Face Shield, Arc Flash. See http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/SALISBURY-Arc-Flash-Face-Shield-3YA90
(September 9, 2010).
12. Grainger. 2010b. NATIONAL SAFETY APPAREL Arc Flash Balaclava,
Navy Blue. See http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/NATIONAL-SAFETY-APPAREL-Arc-Flash-Balaclava-2NNJ8 (September 9, 2010).

13. Grainger. 2010c. SALISBURY Coverall, Arc Flash, L, 8 cal/cm\2\.
See http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/SALISBURY-Coverall-5EU57
(September 9, 2010).
14. Grainger. 2010d. SALISBURY Coverall, Arc Flash, L, 12 cal/cm\2\.
See http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/SALISBURY-Coverall-5EU60
(September 9, 2010).
15. Internal Revenue Service. 2010. Corporation Sourcebook. See
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/bustaxstats/article/0,,id=149687,00.html.
16. Internal Revenue Service. 2012. Publication 525, ``Taxable and
Nontaxable Income.'' Available at http://www.irs.gov/uac/
Publication-525,-Taxable-and-Nontaxable-Income--1.
17. Internal Revenue Service. 2013. ``Topic 751--Social Security and
Medicare Withholding Rates.'' Available at http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc751.html.
18. Lab Safety Supply. 2010a. Safety and Industrial Supplies: Indura
UltraSoft Arc Flash Protective Apparel. See http://www.labsafety.com/catalog/Safety-Industrial-BB0/F/429 (October 19,
2010).
19. Lab Safety Supply. 2010b. Safety and Industrial Supplies: TITAN
Double D-Ring Body Belts. See http://www.labsafety.com/TITAN-Double-D-Ring-Body-Belts_24529135/ (October 19, 2010).
20. Lab Safety Supply. 2010c. Safety and Industrial Supplies: MILLER
DuraLite Full Body Harnesses. See http://www.labsafety.com/MILLER-DuraLite-Full-Body-Harnesses_24536125/ (October 19, 2010).
21. Leigh, J.P., and Marcin, J.P. 2012. ``Workers' compensation
benefits and shifting costs for occupational injury and illness,''
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, April, 54(4):
445-450.
22. Magat, W.A, Viscusi, W.K, and Huber, J, 1996. ``A Reference
Lottery Metric for Valuing Health.'' Management Science 42: 1118-
1130.
23. National Academy of Social Insurance. 2012. ``Workers'
Compensation: Benefits, Coverage, and Costs, 2010,'' August.
Available at http://www.nasi.org/research/2012/report-workers-compensation-benefits-coverage-costs-2010.
24. National Council on Compensation Insurance. 2013. ``ABCs of
Experience Rating.'' Available at https://www.ncci.com/NCCIMain/Education/ExperienceRating/Pages/default.aspx.
25. National Fire Protection Association. 2009. NFPA 70E: Standard
for Electrical Safety in the Workplace. See http://www.nfpa.org.
26. National Safety Council. 2011. Estimating the Costs of
Unintentional Injuries. See http://www.nsc.org/news_resources/injury_and_death_statistics/Pages/EstimatingtheCostsofUnintentionalInjuries.aspx (January 19, 2011).
27. Neuhauser, F.W., Seabury, S.S., and Mendeloff, J. 2013. ``The
Impact of Experience Rating on Small Employers: Would Lowering the
Threshold for Experience Rating Improve Safety?'' Rand Working
Papers WR-955. Newsletter discussion available at http://www.rand.org/jie/centers/workplace-health-safety/projects/experience-rating.html.
28. NTT Workforce Development Institute. 2011. NFPA 70E/Arc Flash
Elec Safety/Safety for Power Gen & Trans & Dist. See http://www.nttinc.com/content/nfpa-70earc-flash-electrical-safety-electric-power-generation-transmission-and-distribution.
29. Occupational Safety and Health Administration Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel. 2003. ``Report of the Small Business Advocacy
Review Panel on the Draft OSHA Standard for Electric Power
Generation, Transmission, and Distribution,'' submitted to Mr. John
Henshaw, Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. June 17, 2003. Ex. 0019.
30. Office of Management and Budget. 2003. Circular A-4. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a-4/.
31. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2010. National Income and
Product Accounts Gross Domestic Product, 3rd quarter 2010 (second
estimate); Corporate Profits, 3rd quarter 2010 (preliminary). See
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm.
32. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2011. Implicit Price Deflators
for Gross Domestic Product. See http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=13&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Year&FirstYear=2005&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no (September 1, 2011).
33. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2001. 2001 Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates, National 3-digit SIC Industry-
Specific estimates. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm#2007.
34. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2007a. National 5-digit
NAICS Industry-Specific estimates. See http://bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm.
35. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2007b. Quarterly Census
of Employment and Wages. See http://www.bls.gov/cew/data.htm.
36. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009a. Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation Summary, September 10, 2009. See http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm.
37. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009b. May 2009 Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates, National 4-digit NAICS Industry-
Specific Estimates. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm.
38. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009c. Occupational Employment
and Wages, May 2009: SOC 37-3013 Tree Trimmers and Pruners. See
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes373013.htm.
39. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010a. Occupational Employment
and Wages, May 2010: 49-9051 Electrical Power-Line Installers and
Repairers. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes499051.htm.
40. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010b. May 2010 National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates: NAICS
221100--Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution.
See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_221100.htm.
41. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010c. Occupational Employment
and Wages, May 2010 49-2095 Electrical and Electronics Repairers,
Powerhouse, Substation, and Relay. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes492095.htm.
42. U.S. Census Bureau. 2002. Statistics of U.S. Businesses.
43. U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. Statistics of U.S. Businesses.
44. U.S. Census Bureau. 2009a. 1997 NAICS and 1987 SIC
Correspondence Tables. See http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naicstab.htm.
45. U.S. Census Bureau. 2009b. 1997 NAICS to 2002 NAICS
Correspondence Tables. See http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/concordances/1997_NAICS_to_2002_NAICS.xls.
46. U.S. Census Bureau. 2009c. 2002 NAICS to 2007 NAICS
Correspondence Tables. See http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/concordances/2002_to_2007_NAICS.xls.
47. U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. County Business Patterns, 1997 and
2007. Growth in establishments and employment in combined Heavy
Construction (NAICS 234000) and Special Trades Contractors (NAICS
235000). See http://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/index.html.
48. U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2003. Form EIA-412
General Information. See http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=eia+form+412&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CC4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eia.gov%2Fsurvey%2Fform%2Feia_412%2Finstructions_form.doc&ei=bEo5T4b5EozLrQfNnJ3WBQ&usg=AFQjCNHtrUZPjFTB08VAwGyOomBrBAjFsA.
49. U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2008a. Form EIA-860
Database Annual Electric Generator Report. See http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html.
50. U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2008b. Form EIA-861
Database. See http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia861.html.
51. U.S. Small Business Administration. 2008. Small Business Size
Standards. See http://www.sba.gov/content/table-small-business-size-standards.
52. Urban Institute/Brookings, 2012. ``Historical Average Federal
Tax Rates for All Households,'' Tax Policy Center, October.
Available at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=456.
53. Viscusi, W.K., and Aldy, J.E. 2003. ``The Value of a Statistical
Life: A Critical

Review of Market Estimates Throughout the World.'' Journal of Risk
and Uncertainty, 27(1): 5-76. See http://camra.msu.edu/documents/ViscusiandAldy2003.pdf.

VII. Federalism

    OSHA reviewed this final rule in accordance with the most recent
Executive Order (E.O.) on Federalism (E.O. 13132, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10,
1999)). This E.O. requires that Federal agencies, to the extent
possible, refrain from limiting State policy options, consult with
States prior to taking any actions that would restrict State policy
options, and take such actions only when clear constitutional authority
exists and the problem is national in scope. E.O. 13132 provides for
preemption of State law only with the expressed consent of Congress.
Any such preemption must be limited to the extent possible.
    Under Section 18 of the OSH Act, Congress expressly provides that
States may adopt, with Federal approval, a plan for the development and
enforcement of occupational safety and health standards; States that
obtain Federal approval for such a plan are referred to as ``State-plan
States'' (29 U.S.C. 667). Occupational safety and health standards
developed by State-plan States must be at least as effective in
providing safe and healthful employment and places of employment as the
Federal standards. Subject to these requirements, State-plan States are
free to develop and enforce under State law their own requirements for
safety and health standards.
    While OSHA drafted this final rule to protect employees in every
State, Section 18(c)(2) of the Act permits State-plan States and
Territories to develop and enforce their own standards for electric
power generation, transmission, and distribution and electrical
protective equipment provided that those requirements are at least as
effective in providing safe and healthful employment and places of
employment as the requirements in this final rule.
    In summary, this final rule complies with E.O. 13132. In States
without OSHA-approved State plans, this final rule limits State policy
options in the same manner as every standard promulgated by OSHA. In
States with OSHA-approved State plans, this rulemaking does not
significantly limit State policy options.

VIII. Unfunded Mandates

    OSHA reviewed this final rule according to the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) and E.O. 13132 (64 FR
43255 (Aug. 10, 1999)). As discussed in the Final Economic and
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, OSHA estimates that compliance with
the rule will require expenditures of less than $100 million per year
by all affected employers. Therefore, this rule is not a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of Section 202 of UMRA (2 U.S.C.
1532).
    OSHA standards do not apply to State or local governments except in
States that have elected voluntarily to adopt a State plan approved by
the Agency. Consequently, the rule does not meet the definition of a
``Federal intergovernmental mandate'' (2 U.S.C. 658(5)).
    Therefore, for the purposes of UMRA, the Agency certifies that this
final rule does not mandate that State, local, or Tribal governments
adopt new, unfunded regulatory obligations or increase expenditures by
the private sector of more than $100 million in any year.

IX. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    OSHA reviewed this final rule in accordance with Executive Order
13175, (65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000)) and determined that it does not
have ``tribal implications'' as defined in that order. The final rule
does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes,
on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.

X. Office of Management and Budget Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995

    The final rule revising the general industry and construction
standards for electric power generation, transmission, and
distribution, and for electrical protective equipment, contains
collection of information requirements (paperwork) subject to review by
OMB. In accordance with Sec.  3506(c)(2) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), OSHA solicited comments on the
information collections included in the proposal. For the proposal, the
Department of Labor also submitted an information collection request to
OMB for review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). OMB subsequently
informed the Department of Labor that its ``action [was] not an
approval to conduct or sponsor an information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.''

A. Information Collection Request for the Proposed Rule

    In the information request for the proposal, OSHA submitted to OMB
the following proposed new collections of information and proposed
removing existing collections of information:
1. Proposed Electrical Protective Equipment in Construction Collections
of Information
    Proposed Sec.  1926.97(c)(2)(xii) provided that the employer must
certify that it tested equipment in accordance with the requirements of
proposed paragraphs (c)(2)(iv), (c)(2)(vii)(C), (c)(2)(viii),
(c)(2)(ix), and(c)(2)(xi) of that section and must ensure that the
certification identified the equipment that passed the test and the
date of the test; the provision also specified that marking the
equipment and entering the results of the tests and the dates of
testing in logs are two acceptable means of meeting these requirements.
2. Proposed Information-Transfer Collections of Information for General
Industry and Construction
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c)(1)(i) and 1910.269(a)(4)(i)(A)
provided that the host employer must inform the contractor of any known
hazards that might be related to the contractor's work and that the
contractor might not recognize; the host employer also must notify the
contractor of any information needed to do assessments required by the
standard.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c)(1)(ii) and 1910.269(a)(4)(i)(B)
provided that the host employer must report any observed contract-
employer-related violations of the standards to the contract employer.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c)(2)(iii) and 1910.269(a)(4)(ii)(C)
provided that the contract employer must advise the host employer of
unique hazards presented by the contract employer's work, unanticipated
hazards found during the contract employer's work that the host
employer did not mention, and measures the contractor took to correct
and prevent recurrences of violations reported by the host employer.
3. Proposed Enclosed Spaces Collections of Information for Construction
    Proposed Sec.  1926.953(a) provided that, if, after the employer
takes the precautions specified by Sec. Sec.  1926.953 and 1926.965,
the hazards remaining in the enclosed space endanger the life of an
entrant or could interfere with escape from the space, then entry into
the enclosed space must meet the permit-

space entry requirements of paragraphs (d) through (k) of Sec.
1910.146.\575\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \575\ Some of the requirements in paragraphs (d) through (k) of
Sec.  1910.146 involve collections of information aimed at
protecting employees from the hazards of entry into permit-required
confined spaces. The proposal noted that Sec.  1910.146 already has
a control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Proposed Removal of General Industry Training Certification
    Existing Sec.  1910.269(a)(2)(vii) requires the employer to certify
that each employee received the training required by Sec.
1910.269(a)(2). The employer must make this certification when the
employee demonstrates proficiency in the work practices involved and
maintain the certification for the duration of the employee's
employment. OSHA proposed to remove the certification requirement
contained in existing Sec.  1910.269(a)(2)(vii).

B. Information Collection Requirements in the Final Rule

    OSHA responded to public comments addressing the proposed rule's
requirements in Section V, Summary and Explanation of the Final Rule,
earlier in this preamble. Also, OSHA has submitted to OMB a new
information collection request in connection with the final rule: a new
information collection request in connection with the final rule titled
``Supporting Statement for the Information Collection Requirements of
the Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution Standards
for Construction and General Industry (29 CFR 1926 Subpart V and 29 CFR
1910.269) and the Electrical Protective Equipment Standards for
Construction and General Industry (29 CFR 1926.97and 29 CFR
1910.137).'' This information collection request includes both the
existing information collection requirements from the general industry
standards and the new information collection requirements from the
construction standards, resulting in a single information collection
request for both the general industry and construction standards.
Therefore, upon publication of the new information collection request,
the Agency will discontinue the existing information collection request
for the general industry standards titled ``Supporting Statement for
the Electrical Protective Equipment Standard (29 CFR 1910.137) and the
Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution Standard (29
CFR 1910.269),'' OMB Control Number 1218-0190.
    The new information collection request contains several newly
identified collections of information requirements in both construction
and general industry (that is, collections of information not included
in the information collection requests for either the proposal or
existing Sec. Sec.  1910.137 and 1910.269). As OSHA explains in detail
in the new information collection request, the majority of the
requirements covered by these newly identified collections of
information consist of usual and customary practices with zero burden.
    In addition to adding newly identified collections of information
to the new information collection request, OSHA modified the following
collections of information. First, the final electrical protective
equipment provision for construction (final Sec.  1926.97(c)(2)(xii))
requires, in addition to the collections of information noted in the
information collection request for the proposal, that the employer make
the required certification available upon request to the Assistant
Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health and to employees and their
authorized representatives. Second, as described in Section V, Summary
and Explanation of the Final Rule, earlier in this preamble, the final
information-transfer provisions for construction and general industry
(final Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c)(1) and (c)(2) and final Sec. Sec.
1910.269(a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii)) differ substantially from the
proposal, and the information collection requests for Sec. Sec.
1910.137 and 1910.269 and for Sec.  1926.97 and Subpart V reflect these
revisions.
    Table 56 lists the provisions of the final rule that OSHA
identified as containing collections of information.

         Table 56--Collections of Information in the Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    General Industry  Standards            Construction  Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   1910.137(c)(2)(xii)           Sec.   1926.97(c)(2)(xii)
Sec.   1910.269(a)(3)(i)             Sec.   1926.950(c)(1)
Sec.   1910.269(a)(3)(ii)            Sec.   1926.950(c)(2)
Sec.   1910.269(c)(1)(i)             Sec.   1926.952(a)(1)
Sec.   1910.269(d)(2)(iii)           NA
Sec.   1910.269(d)(2)(v)             NA
Sec.   1910.269(d)(2)(ix)            NA
Sec.   1910.269(d)(3)(ii)(F)         NA
Sec.   1910.269(d)(5)                NA
Sec.   1910.269(d)(8)(iv)            NA
NA                                   Sec.   1926.953(a)
NA                                   Sec.   1926.953(g)
Sec.   1910.269(f)                   NA
Sec.   1910.269(l)(3)(ii)            Sec.   1926.960(c)(1)(ii)
Sec.   1910.269(m)(3)(i)             Sec.   1926.961(c)(1)
Sec.   1910.269(m)(3)(v)             Sec.   1926.961(c)(5)
Sec.   1910.269(m)(3)(ix)            Sec.   1926.961(c)(9)
Sec.   1910.269(m)(3)(x)(A)          Sec.   1926.961(c)(10)(i)
Sec.   1910.269(m)(3)(x)(D)          Sec.   1926.961(c)(10)(iv)
Sec.   1910.269(o)(3)(iii)(A)        Sec.   1926.963(c)(3)(i)
Sec.   1910.269(p)(4)(ii)            Sec.   1926.959(d)(2)
Sec.   1910.269(s)(1)(ii)            Sec.   1926.967(k)(1)(ii)
Sec.   1910.269(u)(4)(iv)            Sec.   1926.966(e)(4)
Sec.   1910.269(u)(6)(i)             Sec.   1926.966(g)(1)
Sec.   1910.269(v)(4)(iv)            NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(7)(i)(A)          NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(8)(i)             NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(10)(i)            NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(11)(ii)           NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(11)(ix)           NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(11)(x)            NA
Sec.   1910.269(v)(12)               NA
Sec.   1910.269(w)(6)(ii)            Sec.   1926.967(g)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: ``NA'' = Not Applicable.

    Before publishing this final rule, the Department of Labor
submitted the new information collection request to OMB for its
approval.\576\ The new information collection request contains a full
analysis and description of the burden hours and costs associated with
paperwork requirements of the final rule. The public may obtain copies
of the new information collection request on April 14, 2014 at
www.reginfo.gov or by contacting OSHA at<PHONE_NUMBER>. OSHA will
publish a separate notice in the Federal Register that will announce
the results of OMB's review and include in that notice any applicable
OMB control number. Upon publication of that notice, any revisions to
the new information collection request made as a result of OMB's review
will be available at www.reginfo.gov by searching for the OMB-approved
control number for the new information request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \576\ OSHA notes that 24,407 business or other for-profit
establishments are affected by the final rule and estimates that
there are no capital or start-up costs associated with the final
rule's information collection requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department of Labor notes that a Federal agency cannot conduct
or sponsor a collection of information unless OMB approves the
collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
the information collection requirement displays a currently valid OMB
control number. Also, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
employer may be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information if the collection of information does not
display a currently valid OMB control number.

XI. State-Plan Requirements

    When Federal OSHA promulgates a new standard or more stringent
amendment to an existing standard, the 27 States and U.S. Territories
with their own OSHA-approved occupational safety and health plans must
amend their standards to reflect the new standard or amendment, or show
OSHA

why such action is unnecessary, for example, because an existing State
standard covering this area is ``at least as effective'' as the new
Federal standard or amendment (29 CFR 1953.5(a)). The State standard
must be at least as effective as the final Federal rule, must be
applicable to both the private and public (State and local government
employees) sectors, and must be completed within 6 months of the
promulgation date of the final Federal rule. When OSHA promulgates a
new standard or amendment that does not impose additional or more
stringent requirements than an existing standard, State-Plan States are
not required to amend their standards, although the Agency may
encourage them to do so.
    The 21 States and one U.S. Territory with OSHA-approved
occupational safety and health plans covering private employers and
State and local government employees are: Alaska, Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada,
New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. In
addition, four States and one U.S. Territory have OSHA-approved State
Plans that apply to State and local government employees only:
Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and the Virgin Islands.
    This final rule results in more stringent requirements for the work
it covers. Therefore, States and Territories with OSHA-approved State
Plans must adopt comparable amendments to their standards within 6
months of the promulgation date of this rule unless they demonstrate
that such amendments are not necessary because their existing standards
are at least as effective in protecting workers as this final rule.
Each State Plan's existing requirements will continue to be in effect
until it adopts the required revisions.

XII. Dates

    When OSHA promulgates a final rule, the Agency typically provides a
delay to allow employers to become familiar with the rule and to come
into compliance. The Agency requested comments generally on what an
appropriate delay would be for this rule, on how long employers would
need to make purchases necessary for compliance with the proposed rule,
and on the expected useful life of equipment that the proposal would
have required employers to replace.
    OSHA received a wide range of recommendations. A few commenters
noted that the proposed rule was largely the same as existing Sec.
1910.269 and suggested that employers would need minimal time to comply
with the final rule. (See, for example, Exs. 0126, 0480.) BGE commented
that employers would need 2 months ``to evaluate the changes'' (Ex.
0126). IBEW noted that the proposed changes would require only minimal
new training and that employers could implement those changes within 6
months (Ex. 0480).
    Many commenters stated that employers would need time to complete
the budgetary process necessary to acquire funding for compliance and
training. (See, for example, Exs. 0175, 0183, 0202, 0210, 0225, 0229,
0233, 0238, 0239, 0504.) One of these commenters suggested that OSHA
should allow for one complete budget cycle (Ex. 0175). Another
recommended a 3-year delay (Ex. 0238). The rest of these commenters
recommended a 2-year delay. APPA maintained that small employers ``will
require additional time and budget allocations to execute any rules
that may come from this process'' and recommended that OSHA take this
factor into consideration in adopting the final rule (Ex. 0504).
    Siemens Power Generation commented that the proposed rules on
protection from electric arcs were ``so costly and onerous that they
would require sophisticated employers two to three years to implement''
(Ex. 0163). The company contended that small employers would need even
more time so that they could ``take advantage of OSHA outreach programs
and obtain information from industry associations'' (id.).
    Ohio Rural Electric Cooperatives recommended at least a 2-year
period ``to replace and upgrade equipment,'' noting that ``FR clothing
in use at the time these change[s] become final will still have useable
life before they need replacement'' (Ex. 0186). The company noted that
equipment currently in use provides a measure of protection even though
it may not be compliant with the final rule (id.).
    TVA recommended a 3-year delay for the requirement to estimate
employee exposure to incident heat energy, explaining, ``We recommend a
three year delay . . . to complete estimation of heat energy exposures.
This is based on our experience of performing calculations on plant and
transmission circuits down to the 480 V board and panel level'' (Ex.
0213).
    TVA also recommended a 6- to 9-month delay for the arc-flash
protection requirements,\577\ commenting:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \577\ OSHA understands TVA's comment to indicate that it will
take employers 6 to 9 months to purchase protective clothing and
other protective equipment after they determine what protection to
purchase.

    To provide daily-wear FR clothing with an ATPV of 4 to 8 cal/
cm\2\ to meet the minimum proposed requirements for arc flash
protection, we recommend a 6 to 9-month delay . . .. This
recommendation is based on our experience of providing 3,600
employees five sets of daily-wear FR garments until we calculated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the heat energy exposures. [Id.]

    IBEW commented that the only purchases potentially requiring a
delayed compliance deadline involve the acquisition of arc-rated
clothing, although the union also stated that, ``[b]ased on reports
from protective clothing manufacturers and vendors, there is plenty of
it to go around'' (Ex. 0230). IBEW acknowledged that employers might
need some time to implement new protective-clothing policies and
recommended that the final rule provide no more than an 12-month delay
in that regard (Tr. 899).
    A few commenters, such as EEI, stated that, without knowing what
the content of the final rule would be, they could not predict how long
it would take to acquire new equipment, put it into place, and train
employees in its use (Exs. 0177, 0209, 0227). These commenters
recommended that OSHA consider their input after the Agency publishes
the final rule.
    OSHA believes that there will be little impact on the regulated
community as a result of adopting requirements from existing Sec.
1910.137 into new Sec.  1926.97 or existing Sec.  1910.269 into Subpart
V. Almost all affected employers are already complying with these
requirements. (See Section VI, Final Economic Analysis and Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, earlier in the preamble.) Additionally, many of
the revisions in existing Sec. Sec.  1910.137 and 1910.269 are
clarifications of existing requirements or impose requirements that
employers can implement quickly. For example, OSHA is revising
provisions in existing Sec.  1910.269(t) to cover vaults as well as
manholes. The definitions of ``manhole'' and ``vault'' are so
similar,\578\ that OSHA believes that most employers already apply the
relevant provisions to both manholes and vaults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \578\ Existing Sec.  1910.269(x) defines ``manhole'' as ``[a]
subsurface enclosure which personnel may enter and which is used for
the purpose of installing, operating, and maintaining submersible
equipment or cable.'' Existing Sec.  1910.269(x) defines ``vault''
as ``[a]n enclosure, above or below ground, which personnel may
enter and which is used for the purpose of installing, operating, or
maintaining equipment or cable.'' The only vaults addressed in Sec.
1910.269(t), which applies to underground installations, are
underground vaults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency is setting a 90-day effective date for the final rule,
although

OSHA will be imposing compliance deadlines more than 90 days after
publication of the final rule for specific new or revised requirements,
as explained later.
    Four sets of requirements in the final rule set substantial new or
revised duties on employers: The new requirements for transferring
information between host employers and contract employers, revised
provisions on the use of fall protection systems, revised requirements
for minimum approach distances, and new requirements for protecting
employees from the hazards associated with flames and electric arcs. As
described in the following paragraphs, OSHA is adopting delayed
compliance dates for some of these provisions:

A. The New Requirements for Transferring Information Between Host
Employers and Contract Employers (Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c) and
1910.269(a)(3))

    Despite the controversy surrounding these provisions, OSHA believes
that many host employers and contract employers already are
implementing the practices required by final Sec. Sec.  1926.950(c) and
1910.269(a)(3).\579\ Additionally, the host-contractor provisions
generally require the host employer and contract employer to provide
information that they already have to each other, and the provisions do
not require the outlay of any capital expenditures. Therefore, OSHA
does not believe it is necessary to delay enforcement of these
provisions beyond the effective date for the final rule. OSHA expects
employers to be in compliance with the host-contractor requirements
starting 90 days after publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \579\ As the Agency noted in the preamble to the proposed rule,
``Based on research conducted by CONSAD, OSHA believes that the
communications that would be required by the proposed standards
already occur for most affected projects'' (70 FR 34911).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Revised Provisions on the Use of Fall Protection Systems (Sec. Sec.
1926.954(b)(3)(iii) and (b)(3)(iv) and 1910.269(g)(2)(iv)(C), and
(g)(2)(iv)(D))

    As discussed earlier under the summary and explanation for final
Sec.  1926.954(b)(3)(iii), some provisions in that paragraph and in
final Sec.  1910.269(g)(2)(iv)(C) have compliance deadlines. In
Sec. Sec.  1926.954(b)(3)(iii)(B) and 1910.269(g)(2)(iv)(C)(2), the
final rule requires employees to use a personal fall arrest system,
work-positioning equipment, or fall restraint system, as appropriate,
when working at elevated locations more than 1.2 meters (4 feet) above
the ground on poles, towers, or similar structures if the employer does
not provide other fall protection meeting Subpart M of Part 1926.
Paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(C) of Sec.  1926.954 and paragraph
(g)(2)(iv)(C)(3) of Sec.  1910.269 provide exceptions to these general
rules requiring fall protection. Paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(C) of Sec.
1926.954 and paragraph (g)(2)(iv)(C)(3) of Sec.  1910.269 provide that,
until March 31, 2015, qualified employees need not use fall protection
equipment for climbing or changing location on poles, towers, or
similar structures, unless conditions could cause the employee to lose
his or her grip or footing. After that date, qualified employees must
use fall protection for climbing poles, towers, or similar structures,
unless the employer can demonstrate that climbing with fall protection
is infeasible or creates a greater hazard than climbing without it.
Starting April 1, 2015, Sec. Sec.  1926.954(b)(3)(iv) and
1910.269(g)(2)(iv)(D) require the employer to ensure that employees rig
work-positioning systems so that the employee can free fall no more
than 0.6 meters (2 feet).

C. Revised Requirements for Minimum Approach Distances (Sec. Sec.
1926.960(c)(1) and 1910.269(l)(3))

    As discussed in the summary and explanation for Sec.
1926.960(c)(1), that provision in the final rule, and the comparable
one in final Sec.  1910.269(l)(3), set revised requirements for minimum
approach distances. For voltages of 5.1 kilovolts and more, employers
have until April 1, 2015, to comply with the revised provisions,
including the requirement for employers to determine the maximum
anticipated per-unit transient overvoltage, phase-to-ground, through an
engineering analysis.

D. New Requirements for Protecting Employees From the Hazards
Associated With Electric Arcs (Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g) and
1910.269(l)(8))

    Paragraph (g)(1) of final Sec.  1926.960 and paragraph (l)(8)(i) of
final Sec.  1910.269 require the employer to assess the workplace to
identify employees exposed to hazards from flames or from electric
arcs. Although existing Sec.  1910.269 does not explicitly require the
employer to perform such an assessment, this requirement is implicit in
existing Sec.  1910.269(l)(6)(iii). This existing rule requires the
employer to ensure that each employee exposed to the hazards of flames
or electric arcs does not wear clothing that, when exposed to flames or
electric arcs, could increase the extent of injury that would be
sustained by the employee. To comply with this existing provision, the
employer needs to determine if employees are exposed to hazards from
flames or electric arcs. Consequently, OSHA concludes that employers
already should be in substantial compliance with paragraphs (g)(1) of
final Sec.  1926.960 and (l)(8)(i) of final Sec.  1910.269 and that no
compliance delay beyond the effective date for the final rule is
necessary.
    Paragraph (g)(2) of final Sec.  1926.960 and paragraph (l)(8)(ii)
of final Sec.  1910.269 provide that, for each employee exposed to
hazards from electric arcs, the employer make a reasonable estimate of
the incident heat energy to which the employee would be exposed. TVA's
experience estimating incident energy for exposures at its electric
power generation plants and transmission lines led them to recommend a
3-year delay for this element of the standard (id.). However, OSHA does
not believe that TVA's experience forms a reasonable basis for setting
compliance deadlines. In this regard, TVA indicated that it instituted
measures to reduce energy below 100 cal/cm\2\, including modifying some
installations (Ex. 0213). OSHA believes that the initial incident-
energy estimates conducted by TVA took only a fraction of the 3-year
period and that the vast majority of this period involved retrofitting
the circuits to reduce energy exposure below 100 cal/cm\2\.
    Mr. James Tomaseski with IBEW stated that the NESC was adopting
requirements for a similar estimate of incident heat energy that was to
become effective in 2009 (Tr. 898-899).\580\ Mr. Brian Erga with ESCI
stated that a delay of 12 to 18 months for OSHA's clothing-related
provisions would be reasonable (Tr. 1275-1276). Based on Mr.
Tomaseski's testimony, the Agency believes that most employers already
have estimates of incident heat energy for many exposures. Moreover,
the guidance provided in Appendix E should facilitate employers'
efforts to complete these estimates. Consequently, the Agency concludes
that a reasonable compliance date for the requirements to estimate
incident heat energy under final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2) and
1910.269(l)(8)(ii) is January 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \580\ Although the 2007 edition of the NESC to which Mr.
Tomaseski referred was not final at the time of his testimony, the
2007 NESC ultimately set the effective date for its protective
clothing provisions as January 1, 2009 (Ex. 0533).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (g)(3) of final Sec.  1926.960 and paragraph (l)(8)(iii)
of final Sec.  1910.269 require the employer to ensure that each
employee exposed to hazards from flames or electric arcs does not wear
clothing that could melt onto

his or her skin or that could ignite and continue to burn when exposed
to flames or the heat energy estimated under Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2)
and 1910.269(l)(8)(ii). Existing Sec.  1910.269(l)(6)(iii) contains a
comparable requirement without the reference to incident heat-energy
estimates. As previously indicated, the final rule delays the
requirements for incident heat-energy estimates until January 1, 2015.
However, the Agency believes that it is important to continue the
protection against clothing ignition contained in existing Sec.
1910.269(l)(6)(iii). Therefore, OSHA is not setting a delayed
compliance date for final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(3) and
1910.269(l)(8)(iii) beyond the effective date for the final rule. Until
the employer completes the estimates required by final Sec. Sec.
1926.960(g)(2) and 1910.269(l)(8)(ii), OSHA will enforce Sec. Sec.
1926.960(g)(3) and 1910.269(l)(8)(iii) as it does existing Sec.
1910.269(l)(6)(iii); that is, the clothing must not ignite and continue
to burn when exposed to electric arcs the employee may encounter.
    Paragraph (g)(4) of final Sec.  1926.960 and paragraph (l)(8)(iv)
of final Sec.  1910.269 generally require the employer to ensure that
the outer layer of clothing worn by an employees is flame resistant
under specified conditions. The first three conditions are: (1) There
is employee exposure to contact with energized circuit parts operating
at more than 600 volts; (2) an electric arc could ignite flammable
material in the work area that could, in turn, ignite the employee's
clothing, and (3) molten metal or electric arcs from faulted conductors
in the work area could ignite the employee's clothing. As a practical
matter, the employer's assessment of employee exposure to hazards from
flames or from electric arcs (as required by final Sec. Sec.
1926.960(g)(1) and 1910.269(l)(8)(i)) will determine whether one or
more of these conditions are present. As previously noted, the
requirement for the employer to perform the assessment becomes
effective with the rest of the rule, and OSHA determined that employers
need no additional delay to comply with final Sec. Sec.
1926.960(g)(4)(i) through (g)(4)(iii) and 1910.269(l)(8)(iv)(A) through
(l)(8)(iv)(C).
    Final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(4)(iv) and 1910.269(l)(8)(iv)(D)
generally require flame-resistant clothing when the incident energy
estimated under Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2) and 1910.269(l)(8)(ii)
exceeds 2.0 cal/cm\2\. This is a substantially new requirement, and
compliance is dependent on completion of the incident heat-energy
estimates required by Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2) and 1910.269(l)(8)(ii).
As noted earlier, OSHA does not require compliance with the provisions
on incident heat-energy estimates until January 1, 2015. Moreover, as
explained later, OSHA is delaying requirements for arc-rated protection
under final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(5) and 1910.269(l)(8)(v) until April
1, 2015. For these reasons, the Agency is adopting a compliance date
for final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(4)(iv) and 1910.269(l)(8)(iv)(D) of
April 1, 2015.
    Final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(5) and 1910.269(l)(8)(v) provide that,
with some exceptions, employers ensure that employees exposed to
electric-arc hazards wear protective clothing and other protective
equipment with an arc rating greater than or equal to the heat energy
estimated under final Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2) and 1910.269(l)(8)(ii).
Clearly, the employer must complete those incident heat-energy
estimates before purchasing protection with an appropriate arc rating.
Therefore, employers may delay complying with Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(5)
and 1910.269(l)(8)(v) until April 1, 2015. This delay provides
employers additional time, when added to the period provided for
estimating incident heat energy under Sec. Sec.  1926.960(g)(2) and
1910.269(l)(8)(ii), to purchase compliant protective clothing and other
protective equipment. The Agency could impose the same deadline for the
requirements to estimate incident heat energy and to provide protective
clothing and other protective equipment based those estimates; however,
OSHA believes that having separate deadlines will ensure that employers
have additional time after initially making estimates of heat energy to
make necessary adjustments in work practices and circuit protection to
reduce those estimates to a level where employers can use arc-rated
protection with acceptably low arc ratings. If OSHA were to require
compliance with both sets of requirements at the same time, employers
initially might have to provide protection with high arc ratings. The
dates adopted by this final rule provide employers with adequate time
to ensure that incident heat-energy exposure levels for employees are
as low as practical when the Agency begins enforcing Sec. Sec.
1926.960(g)(5) and 1910.269(l)(8)(v).
    The following table shows important compliance dates for the final
rule.
    The final rule becomes effective on July 10, 2014. Employer
obligations under the specific provisions listed in this table commence
on the dates indicated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Requirement                     Subpart V            Sec.   1910.269           Compliance date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fall protection must be used by a    Sec.                    (g)(2)(iv)(C)(3)......  April 1, 2015.
 qualified employee climbing or       1926.954(b)(3)(iii)(C
 changing location on poles,          ).
 towers, or similar structures
 unless the employer can
 demonstrate that climbing with
 fall protection is infeasible or
 creates a greater hazard than
 climbing or changing location
 without it.
Work-positioning systems must be     Sec.                    (g)(2)(iv)(D).........  April 1, 2015.
 rigged so that an employee can       1926.954(b)(3)(iv).
 free fall no more than 0.6 m (2
 ft).
Until the compliance deadline,       Sec.   1926.960(c)(1)   (l)(3) and Table        April 1, 2015.
 employers may continue to use the    and Table V[dash]2.     R[dash]3.
 minimum approach distances in
 existing Subpart V and Sec.
 1910.269 for voltages of 5.1
 kilovolts and more. (Table 6 in
 Appendix B to Subpart V and in
 Table 6 through Table 13 in
 Appendix B to Sec.   1910.269
 specify the existing minimum
 approach distances.\1\) After the
 compliance deadline, employers
 must determine the maximum
 anticipated per-unit transient
 overvoltage, phase-to-ground in
 accordance with Sec.  Sec.
 1926.960(c)(1)(ii) and
 1910.269(l)(3)(ii) and must
 establish minimum approach
 distances in accordance with Sec.
 Sec.   1926.960(c)(1)(i) and
 1910.269(l)(3)(i).

The employer must make a reasonable  Sec.   1926.960(g)(2).  (l)(8)(ii)............  January 1, 2015.
 estimate of the incident heat
 energy to which the employee would
 be exposed.
The employer must ensure that the    Sec.  Sec.              (l)(8)(iv)(D).........  April 1, 2015.
 outer layer of clothing, except      1926.960(g)(4)(iv).
 for clothing not required to be
 arc rated, is flame resistant when
 the estimated incident heat energy
 exceeds 2.0 cal/cm\2\.
The employer must ensure that        Sec.  Sec.              (l)(8)(v).............  April 1, 2015.
 employees with exposure to           1926.960(g)(5).
 electric-arc hazards wear
 protective clothing and other
 protective equipment with an arc
 rating greater than or equal to
 the estimated heat energy whenever
 that estimate exceeds 2.0 cal/
 cm\2\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 6 in Appendix B to Subpart V and in Table 6 through Table 13 in Appendix B to Sec.   1910.269 contain
  minimum approach distances that duplicate the minimum approach distances in Table V-1 and Table V-2 in
  existing Subpart V and Table R-6 through R-8 in existing Sec.   1910.269. OSHA reformatted and deleted
  extraneous information from these tables in the final rule; however, the relevant distances are identical to
  the existing tables.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1926

    Electric power, Fire prevention, Hazardous substances,
Incorporation by reference, Occupational safety and health, Safety.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation
of this notice.
    This action is taken pursuant to sections 3704 et seq., Pub. L.
107-217, 116 STAT. 1062, (40 U.S.C. 3704 et seq.); sections 4, 6, and
8, Pub. L. 91-596, 84 STAT. 1590 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657), Secretary
of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912 (Jan. 25, 2012)), and 29 CFR
Part 1911.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on December 6, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

    Accordingly, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
amends Parts 1910 and 1926 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal
Regulation as follows:

PART 1910--[AMENDED]

Subpart I--Personal Protective Equipment

0
1. Revise the authority citation for Subpart I of part 1910 to read as
follows:

    Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of Labor's Order
No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90
(55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), 5-2002 (67 FR
65008), 5-2007 (72 FR 31160), 4-2010 (75 FR 55355), or 1-2012 (77 FR
3912), as applicable, and 29 CFR Part 1911.

0
2. Revise Sec.  1910.136(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  1910.136  Foot protection.

    (a) General requirements. The employer shall ensure that each
affected employee uses protective footwear when working in areas where
there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects,
or objects piercing the sole, or when the use of protective footwear
will protect the affected employee from an electrical hazard, such as a
static-discharge or electric-shock hazard, that remains after the
employer takes other necessary protective measures.
* * * * *

0
3. Revise Sec.  1910.137 to read as follows:

Sec.  1910.137  Electrical protective equipment.

    (a) Design requirements for specific types of electrical protective
equipment. Rubber insulating blankets, rubber insulating matting,
rubber insulating covers, rubber insulating line hose, rubber
insulating gloves, and rubber insulating sleeves shall meet the
following requirements:
    (1) Manufacture and marking of rubber insulating equipment. (i)
Blankets, gloves, and sleeves shall be produced by a seamless process.
    (ii) Each item shall be clearly marked as follows:
    (A) Class 00 equipment shall be marked Class 00.
    (B) Class 0 equipment shall be marked Class 0.
    (C) Class 1 equipment shall be marked Class 1.
    (D) Class 2 equipment shall be marked Class 2.
    (E) Class 3 equipment shall be marked Class 3.
    (F) Class 4 equipment shall be marked Class 4.
    (G) Nonozone-resistant equipment shall be marked Type I.
    (H) Ozone-resistant equipment shall be marked Type II.
    (I) Other relevant markings, such as the manufacturer's
identification and the size of the equipment, may also be provided.
    (iii) Markings shall be nonconducting and shall be applied in such
a manner as not to impair the insulating qualities of the equipment.
    (iv) Markings on gloves shall be confined to the cuff portion of
the glove.
    (2) Electrical requirements. (i) Equipment shall be capable of
withstanding the ac proof-test voltage specified in Table I-1 or the dc
proof-test voltage specified in Table I-2.
    (A) The proof test shall reliably indicate that the equipment can
withstand the voltage involved.
    (B) The test voltage shall be applied continuously for 3 minutes
for equipment other than matting and shall be applied continuously for
1 minute for matting.
    (C) Gloves shall also be capable of separately withstanding the ac
proof-test voltage specified in Table I-1 after a 16-hour water soak.
(See the note following paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section.)
    (ii) When the ac proof test is used on gloves, the 60-hertz proof-
test current may not exceed the values specified in Table I-1 at any
time during the test period.
    (A) If the ac proof test is made at a frequency other than 60
hertz, the permissible proof-test current shall be computed from the
direct ratio of the frequencies.
    (B) For the test, gloves (right side out) shall be filled with tap
water and immersed in water to a depth that is in accordance with Table
I-3. Water shall be added to or removed from the glove, as necessary,
so that the water level is the same inside and outside the glove.
    (C) After the 16-hour water soak specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(i)(C) of this section, the 60-hertz proof-test current may not
exceed the values given in Table I-1 by more than 2 milliamperes.

    (iii) Equipment that has been subjected to a minimum breakdown
voltage test may not be used for electrical protection. (See the note
following paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section.)
    (iv) Material used for Type II insulating equipment shall be
capable of withstanding an ozone test, with no visible effects. The
ozone test shall reliably indicate that the material will resist ozone
exposure in actual use. Any visible signs of ozone deterioration of the
material, such as checking, cracking, breaks, or pitting, is evidence
of failure to meet the requirements for ozone-resistant material. (See
the note following paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) of this section.)
    (3) Workmanship and finish. (i) Equipment shall be free of physical
irregularities that can adversely affect the insulating properties of
the equipment and that can be detected by the tests or inspections
required under this section.
    (ii) Surface irregularities that may be present on all rubber goods
(because of imperfections on forms or molds or because of inherent
difficulties in the manufacturing process) and that may appear as
indentations, protuberances, or imbedded foreign material are
acceptable under the following conditions:
    (A) The indentation or protuberance blends into a smooth slope when
the material is stretched.
    (B) Foreign material remains in place when the insulating material
is folded and stretches with the insulating material surrounding it.

    Note to paragraph (a): Rubber insulating equipment meeting the
following national consensus standards is deemed to be in compliance
with the performance requirements of paragraph (a) of this section:
    American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D120-09,
Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating Gloves.
    ASTM D178-01 (2010), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Matting.
    ASTM D1048-12, Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating
Blankets.
    ASTM D1049-98 (2010), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Covers.
    ASTM D1050-05 (2011), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Line Hose.
    ASTM D1051-08, Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating
Sleeves.
    The preceding standards also contain specifications for
conducting the various tests required in paragraph (a) of this
section. For example, the ac and dc proof tests, the breakdown test,
the water-soak procedure, and the ozone test mentioned in this
paragraph are described in detail in these ASTM standards.
    ASTM F1236-96 (2012), Standard Guide for Visual Inspection of
Electrical Protective Rubber Products, presents methods and
techniques for the visual inspection of electrical protective
equipment made of rubber. This guide also contains descriptions and
photographs of irregularities that can be found in this equipment.
    ASTM F819-10, Standard Terminology Relating to Electrical
Protective Equipment for Workers, includes definitions of terms
relating to the electrical protective equipment covered under this
section.

    (b) Design requirements for other types of electrical protective
equipment. The following requirements apply to the design and
manufacture of electrical protective equipment that is not covered by
paragraph (a) of this section:
    (1)Voltage withstand. Insulating equipment used for the protection
of employees shall be capable of withstanding, without failure, the
voltages that may be imposed upon it.

    Note to paragraph (b)(1): These voltages include transient
overvoltages, such as switching surges, as well as nominal line
voltage. See Appendix B to Sec.  1910.269 for a discussion of
transient overvoltages on electric power transmission and
distribution systems. See IEEE Std 516-2009, IEEE Guide for
Maintenance Methods on Energized Power Lines, for methods of
determining the magnitude of transient overvoltages on an electrical
system and for a discussion comparing the ability of insulation
equipment to withstand a transient overvoltage based on its ability
to withstand ac voltage testing.

    (2) Equipment current. (i) Protective equipment used for the
primary insulation of employees from energized circuit parts shall be
capable of passing a current test when subjected to the highest nominal
voltage on which the equipment is to be used.
    (ii) When insulating equipment is tested in accordance with
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, the equipment current may not
exceed 1 microampere per kilovolt of phase-to-phase applied voltage.

    Note 1 to paragraph (b)(2):  This paragraph applies to equipment
that provides primary insulation of employees from energized parts.
It does not apply to equipment used for secondary insulation or
equipment used for brush contact only.

    Note 2 to paragraph (b)(2): For ac excitation, this current
consists of three components: Capacitive current because of the
dielectric properties of the insulating material itself; conduction
current through the volume of the insulating equipment; and leakage
current along the surface of the tool or equipment. The conduction
current is normally negligible. For clean, dry insulating equipment,
the leakage current is small, and the capacitive current
predominates.

    Note to paragraph (b): Plastic guard equipment is deemed to
conform to the performance requirements of paragraph (b) of this
section if it meets, and is used in accordance with, ASTM F712-06
(2011), Standard Test Methods and Specifications for Electrically
Insulating Plastic Guard Equipment for Protection of Workers.

    (c) In-service care and use of electrical protective equipment. (1)
General. Electrical protective equipment shall be maintained in a safe,
reliable condition.
    (2) Specific requirements. The following specific requirements
apply to rubber insulating blankets, rubber insulating covers, rubber
insulating line hose, rubber insulating gloves, and rubber insulating
sleeves:
    (i) Maximum use voltages shall conform to those listed in Table I-
4.
    (ii) Insulating equipment shall be inspected for damage before each
day's use and immediately following any incident that can reasonably be
suspected of causing damage. Insulating gloves shall be given an air
test, along with the inspection.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2)(ii): ASTM F1236-96 (2012), Standard
Guide for Visual Inspection of Electrical Protective Rubber
Products, presents methods and techniques for the visual inspection
of electrical protective equipment made of rubber. This guide also
contains descriptions and photographs of irregularities that can be
found in this equipment.

    (iii) Insulating equipment with any of the following defects may
not be used:
    (A) A hole, tear, puncture, or cut;
    (B) Ozone cutting or ozone checking (that is, a series of
interlacing cracks produced by ozone on rubber under mechanical
stress);
    (C) An embedded foreign object;
    (D) Any of the following texture changes: swelling, softening,
hardening, or becoming sticky or inelastic.
    (E) Any other defect that damages the insulating properties.
    (iv) Insulating equipment found to have other defects that might
affect its insulating properties shall be removed from service and
returned for testing under paragraphs (c)(2)(viii) and (c)(2)(ix) of
this section.
    (v) Insulating equipment shall be cleaned as needed to remove
foreign substances.
    (vi) Insulating equipment shall be stored in such a location and in
such a manner as to protect it from light, temperature extremes,
excessive humidity, ozone, and other damaging substances and
conditions.
    (vii) Protector gloves shall be worn over insulating gloves, except
as follows:
    (A) Protector gloves need not be used with Class 0 gloves, under
limited-use conditions, when small equipment and parts manipulation
necessitate unusually high finger dexterity.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(A): Persons inspecting rubber
insulating gloves used under these conditions need to take extra
care in visually examining them. Employees using rubber insulating
gloves under these conditions need to take extra care to avoid
handling sharp objects.

    (B) If the voltage does not exceed 250 volts, ac, or 375 volts, dc,
protector gloves need not be used with Class 00 gloves, under limited-
use conditions, when small equipment and parts manipulation necessitate
unusually high finger dexterity.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(B): Persons inspecting rubber
insulating gloves used under these conditions need to take extra
care in visually examining them. Employees using rubber insulating
gloves under these conditions need to take extra care to avoid
handling sharp objects.

    (C) Any other class of glove may be used without protector gloves,
under limited-use conditions, when small equipment and parts
manipulation necessitate unusually high finger dexterity but only if
the employer can demonstrate that the possibility of physical damage to
the gloves is small and if the class of glove is one class higher than
that required for the voltage involved.
    (D) Insulating gloves that have been used without protector gloves
may not be reused until they have been tested under the provisions of
paragraphs (c)(2)(viii) and (c)(2)(ix) of this section.
    (viii) Electrical protective equipment shall be subjected to
periodic electrical tests. Test voltages and the maximum intervals
between tests shall be in accordance with Table I-4 and Table I-5.
    (ix) The test method used under paragraphs (c)(2)(viii) and
(c)(2)(xi) of this section shall reliably indicate whether the
insulating equipment can withstand the voltages involved.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2)(ix): Standard electrical test methods
considered as meeting this paragraph are given in the following
national consensus standards:
    ASTM D120-09, Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating
Gloves.
    ASTM D178-01 (2010), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Matting.
    ASTM D1048-12, Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating
Blankets.
    ASTM D1049-98 (2010), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Covers.
    ASTM D1050-05 (2011), Standard Specification for Rubber
Insulating Line Hose.
    ASTM D1051-08, Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating
Sleeves.
    ASTM F478-09, Standard Specification for In-Service Care of
Insulating Line Hose and Covers.
    ASTM F479-06 (2011), Standard Specification for In-Service Care
of Insulating Blankets.
    ASTM F496-08, Standard Specification for In-Service Care of
Insulating Gloves and Sleeves.

    (x) Insulating equipment failing to pass inspections or electrical
tests may not be used by employees, except as follows:
    (A) Rubber insulating line hose may be used in shorter lengths with
the defective portion cut off.
    (B) Rubber insulating blankets may be salvaged by severing the
defective area from the undamaged portion of the blanket. The resulting
undamaged area may not be smaller than 560 millimeters by 560
millimeters (22 inches by 22 inches) for Class 1, 2, 3, and 4 blankets.
    (C) Rubber insulating blankets may be repaired using a compatible
patch that results in physical and electrical properties equal to those
of the blanket.
    (D) Rubber insulating gloves and sleeves with minor physical
defects, such as small cuts, tears, or punctures, may be repaired by
the application of a compatible patch. Also, rubber insulating gloves
and sleeves with minor surface blemishes may be repaired with a
compatible liquid compound. The repaired area shall have electrical and
physical properties equal to those of the surrounding material. Repairs
to gloves are permitted only in the area between the wrist and the
reinforced edge of the opening.
    (xi) Repaired insulating equipment shall be retested before it may
be used by employees.
    (xii) The employer shall certify that equipment has been tested in
accordance with the requirements of paragraphs (c)(2)(iv),
(c)(2)(vii)(D), (c)(2)(viii), (c)(2)(ix), and (c)(2)(xi) of this
section. The certification shall identify the equipment that passed the
test and the date it was tested and shall be made available upon
request to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health
and to employees or their authorized representatives.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2)(xii): Marking equipment with, and
entering onto logs, the results of the tests and the dates of
testing are two acceptable means of meeting the certification
requirement.

                                                          Table I-1--AC Proof-Test Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Maximum proof-test current, mA (gloves only)
                                                                   Proof-test    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Class of Equipment                         Voltage  rms V    280-mm (11-in)    360-mm (14-in)    410-mm (16-in)    460-mm (18-in)
                                                                                glove             glove             glove             glove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00............................................................             2,500                 8                12  ................  ................
0.............................................................             5,000                 8                12                14                16
1.............................................................            10,000  ................                14                16                18
2.............................................................            20,000  ................                16                18                20
3.............................................................            30,000  ................                18                20                22
4.............................................................            40,000  ................  ................                22                24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Table I-2--DC Proof-Test Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Proof-test
                   Class of equipment                         voltage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
00......................................................          10,000
0.......................................................          20,000
1.......................................................          40,000
2.......................................................          50,000
3.......................................................          60,000
4.......................................................          70,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The dc voltages listed in this table are not appropriate for proof
  testing rubber insulating line hose or covers. For this equipment, dc
  proof tests shall use a voltage high enough to indicate that the
  equipment can be safely used at the voltages listed in Table I-4. See
  ASTM D1050-05 (2011) and ASTM D1049-98 (2010) for further information
  on proof tests for rubber insulating line hose and covers,
  respectively.

                                   Table I-3--Glove Tests--Water Level \1\ \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    AC proof test                        DC proof test
             Class of glove             ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                mm                 in                mm                in
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00.....................................                38               1.5                 38               1.5
0......................................                38               1.5                 38               1.5
1......................................                38               1.5                 51               2.0
2......................................                64               2.5                 76               3.0
3......................................                89               3.5                102               4.0
4......................................               127               5.0                153               6.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The water level is given as the clearance from the reinforced edge of the glove to the water line, with a
  tolerance of 13 mm. (0.5 in.).
\2\ If atmospheric conditions make the specified clearances impractical, the clearances may be increased by a
  maximum of 25 mm. (1 in.).

                          Table I-4--Rubber Insulating Equipment, Voltage Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Maximum use
                    Class of equipment                       voltage \1\ AC    Retest voltage    Retest voltage
                                                                   rms           \2\ AC rms        \2\ DC avg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00........................................................               500             2,500            10,000
0.........................................................             1,000             5,000            20,000
1.........................................................             7,500            10,000            40,000
2.........................................................            17,000            20,000            50,000
3.........................................................            26,500            30,000            60,000
4.........................................................            36,000            40,000            70,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The maximum use voltage is the ac voltage (rms) classification of the protective equipment that designates
  the maximum nominal design voltage of the energized system that may be safely worked. The nominal design
  voltage is equal to the phase-to-phase voltage on multiphase circuits. However, the phase-to-ground potential
  is considered to be the nominal design voltage if:
(1) There is no multiphase exposure in a system area and the voltage exposure is limited to the phase-to-ground
  potential, or
(2) The electric equipment and devices are insulated or isolated or both so that the multiphase exposure on a
  grounded wye circuit is removed.
\2\ The proof-test voltage shall be applied continuously for at least 1 minute, but no more than 3 minutes.

         Table I-5--Rubber Insulating Equipment, Test Intervals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Type of  equipment                      When to test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubber insulating line hose..  Upon indication that insulating value is
                                suspect and after repair.
Rubber insulating covers.....  Upon indication that insulating value is
                                suspect and after repair.
Rubber insulating blankets...  Before first issue and every 12 months
                                thereafter; \1\ upon indication that
                                insulating value is suspect; and after
                                repair.
Rubber insulating gloves.....  Before first issue and every 6 months
                                thereafter; \1\ upon indication that
                                insulating value is suspect; after
                                repair; and after use without
                                protectors.
Rubber insulating sleeves....  Before first issue and every 12 months
                                thereafter; \1\ upon indication that
                                insulating value is suspect; and after
                                repair.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If the insulating equipment has been electrically tested but not
  issued for service, the insulating equipment may not be placed into
  service unless it has been electrically tested within the previous 12
  months.

0
4. In Appendix B to Subpart I of Part 1910, revise the heading and
paragraph 10 to read as follows:

Appendix B to Subpart I of Part 1910--Nonmandatory Compliance
Guidelines for Hazard Assessment and Personal Protective Equipment
Selection

* * * * *
    10. Selection guidelines for foot protection. Safety shoes and
boots which meet the ANSI Z41-1991 Standard provide both impact and
compression protection. Where necessary, safety shoes can be
obtained which provide puncture protection. In some work situations,
metatarsal protection should be provided, and in other special
situations electrical conductive or insulating safety shoes would be
appropriate.
    Safety shoes or boots with impact protection would be required
for carrying or handling materials such as packages, objects, parts
or heavy tools, which could be dropped; and, for other activities
where objects might fall onto the feet. Safety shoes or boots with
compression protection would be required for work activities
involving skid trucks (manual material handling carts) around bulk
rolls (such as paper rolls) and around heavy pipes, all of which
could potentially roll over an employee's feet. Safety shoes or
boots with puncture protection would be required where sharp objects
such as nails, wire, tacks, screws, large staples, scrap metal etc.,
could be stepped on by employees causing a foot injury. Electrically
conductive shoes would be required as a supplementary form of
protection for work activities in which there is a danger of fire or
explosion from the discharge of static electricity. Electrical-
hazard or dielectric footwear would be required as a supplementary
form of protection when an employee standing on the ground is
exposed to hazardous step or touch potential (the difference in
electrical potential between the feet or between the hands and feet)
or when primary forms of electrical protective equipment, such as
rubber insulating gloves and blankets, do not provide complete
protection for an employee standing on the ground.
    Some occupations (not a complete list) for which foot protection
should be routinely considered are: Shipping and receiving clerks,
stock clerks, carpenters, electricians, machinists, mechanics and
repairers, plumbers and pipe fitters, structural metal workers,
assemblers, drywall installers and lathers, packers, wrappers,
craters, punch and stamping press operators, sawyers, welders,
laborers, freight handlers, gardeners and grounds-keepers, timber
cutting and logging workers, stock handlers and warehouse laborers.
* * * * *

Subpart R--Special Industries

0
5. Revise the authority citation for Subpart R of Part 1910 to read as
follows:

    Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of Labor's Order
No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90
(55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 5-2007 (72 FR 31159), 4-2010 (75 FR
55355), or 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), as applicable; and 29 CFR Part 1911.

0
6. Revise Sec.  1910.269 to read as follows:

Sec.  1910.269  Electric power generation, transmission, and
distribution.

    (a) General--(1) Application. (i) This section covers the operation
and maintenance of electric power generation, control, transformation,
transmission, and distribution lines and equipment. These provisions
apply to:
    (A) Power generation, transmission, and distribution installations,
including related equipment for the purpose of communication or
metering that are accessible only to qualified employees;

    Note to paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A):  The types of installations
covered by this paragraph include the generation, transmission, and
distribution installations of electric utilities, as well as
equivalent installations of industrial establishments. Subpart S of
this part covers supplementary electric generating equipment that is
used to supply a workplace for emergency, standby, or similar
purposes only. (See paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) of this section.)

    (B) Other installations at an electric power generating station, as
follows:
    (1) Fuel and ash handling and processing installations, such as
coal conveyors,
    (2) Water and steam installations, such as penstocks, pipelines,
and tanks, providing a source of energy for electric generators, and
    (3) Chlorine and hydrogen systems;
    (C) Test sites where employees perform electrical testing involving
temporary measurements associated with electric power generation,
transmission, and distribution in laboratories, in the field, in
substations, and on lines, as opposed to metering, relaying, and
routine line work;
    (D) Work on, or directly associated with, the installations covered
in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A) through (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section; and
    (E) Line-clearance tree-trimming operations, as follows:
    (1) Entire Sec.  1910.269 of this part, except paragraph (r)(1) of
this section, applies to line-clearance tree-trimming operations
performed by qualified employees (those who are knowledgeable in the
construction and operation of the electric power generation,
transmission, or distribution equipment involved, along with the
associated hazards).
    (2) Paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (b), (c), (g), (k), (p), and (r) of
this section apply to line-clearance tree-trimming operations performed
by line-clearance tree trimmers who are not qualified employees.
    (ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, Sec.
1910.269 of this part does not apply:
    (A) To construction work, as defined in Sec.  1910.12 of this part,
except for line-clearance tree-trimming operations and work involving
electric power generation installations as specified in Sec.
1926.950(a)(3) of this chapter; or
    (B) To electrical installations, electrical safety-related work
practices, or electrical maintenance considerations covered by Subpart
S of this part.

    Note 1 to paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B): The Occupational Safety and
Health Administration considers work practices conforming to
Sec. Sec.  1910.332 through 1910.335 as complying with the
electrical safety-related work-practice requirements of Sec.
1910.269 identified in Table 1 of Appendix A-2 to this section,
provided that employers are performing the work on a generation or
distribution installation meeting Sec. Sec.  1910.303 through
1910.308. This table also identifies provisions in Sec.  1910.269
that apply to work by qualified persons directly on, or associated
with, installations of electric power generation, transmission, and
distribution lines or equipment, regardless of compliance with
Sec. Sec.  1910.332 through 1910.335.

    Note 2 to paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B): The Occupational Safety and
Health Administration considers work practices performed by
qualified persons and conforming to Sec.  1910.269 as complying with
Sec. Sec.  1910.333(c) and 1910.335.

    (iii) This section applies in addition to all other applicable
standards contained in this Part 1910. Employers covered under this
section are not exempt from complying with other applicable provisions
in Part 1910 by the operation of Sec.  1910.5(c). Specific references
in this section to other sections of Part 1910 are for emphasis only.
    (2) Training. (i) All employees performing work covered by this
section shall be trained as follows:
    (A) Each employee shall be trained in, and familiar with, the
safety-related work practices, safety procedures, and other safety
requirements in this section that pertain to his or her job
assignments.
    (B) Each employee shall also be trained in and familiar with any
other safety practices, including applicable emergency procedures (such
as pole-top and manhole rescue), that are not specifically addressed by
this section but that are related to his or her work and are necessary
for his or her safety.
    (C) The degree of training shall be determined by the risk to the
employee for the hazard involved.

    (ii) Each qualified employee shall also be trained and competent
in:
    (A) The skills and techniques necessary to distinguish exposed live
parts from other parts of electric equipment,
    (B) The skills and techniques necessary to determine the nominal
voltage of exposed live parts,
    (C) The minimum approach distances specified in this section
corresponding to the voltages to which the qualified employee will be
exposed and the skills and techniques necessary to maintain those
distances,
    (D) The proper use of the special precautionary techniques,
personal protective equipment, insulating and shielding materials, and
insulated tools for working on or near exposed energized parts of
electric equipment, and
    (E) The recognition of electrical hazards to which the employee may
be exposed and the skills and techniques necessary to control or avoid
these hazards.

    Note to paragraph (a)(2)(ii): For the purposes of this section,
a person must have the training required by paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of
this section to be considered a qualified person.

    (iii) Each line-clearance tree trimmer who is not a qualified
employee shall also be trained and competent in:
    (A) The skills and techniques necessary to distinguish exposed live
parts from other parts of electric equipment,
    (B) The skills and techniques necessary to determine the nominal
voltage of exposed live parts, and
    (C) The minimum approach distances specified in this section
corresponding to the voltages to which the employee will be exposed and
the skills and techniques necessary to maintain those distances.
    (iv) The employer shall determine, through regular supervision and
through inspections conducted on at least an annual basis, that each
employee is complying with the safety-related work practices required
by this section.
    (v) An employee shall receive additional training (or retraining)
under any of the following conditions:
    (A) If the supervision or annual inspections required by paragraph
(a)(2)(iv) of this section indicate that the employee is not complying
with the safety-related work practices required by this section, or
    (B) If new technology, new types of equipment, or changes in
procedures necessitate the use of safety-related work practices that
are different from those which the employee would normally use, or
    (C) If he or she must employ safety-related work practices that are
not normally used during his or her regular job duties.

    Note to paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C): The Occupational Safety and
Health Administration considers tasks that are performed less often
than once per year to necessitate retraining before the performance
of the work practices involved.

    (vi) The training required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section
shall be of the classroom or on-the-job type.
    (vii) The training shall establish employee proficiency in the work
practices required by this section and shall introduce the procedures
necessary for compliance with this section.
    (viii) The employer shall ensure that each employee has
demonstrated proficiency in the work practices involved before that
employee is considered as having completed the training required by
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

    Note 1 to paragraph (a)(2)(viii): Though they are not required
by this paragraph, employment records that indicate that an employee
has successfully completed the required training are one way of
keeping track of when an employee has demonstrated proficiency.

    Note 2 to paragraph (a)(2)(viii): For an employee with previous
training, an employer may determine that that employee has
demonstrated the proficiency required by this paragraph using the
following process:
    (1) Confirm that the employee has the training required by
paragraph (a)(2) of this section,
    (2) Use an examination or interview to make an initial
determination that the employee understands the relevant safety-
related work practices before he or she performs any work covered by
this section, and
    (3) Supervise the employee closely until that employee has
demonstrated proficiency as required by this paragraph.

    (3) Information transfer.
    (i) Before work begins, the host employer shall inform contract
employers of:
    (A) The characteristics of the host employer's installation that
are related to the safety of the work to be performed and are listed in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (a)(4)(v) of this section;

    Note to paragraph (a)(3)(i)(A): This paragraph requires the host
employer to obtain information listed in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)
through (a)(4)(v) of this section if it does not have this
information in existing records.

    (B) Conditions that are related to the safety of the work to be
performed, that are listed in paragraphs (a)(4)(vi) through
(a)(4)(viii) of this section, and that are known to the host employer;

    Note to paragraph (a)(3)(i)(B):  For the purposes of this
paragraph, the host employer need only provide information to
contract employers that the host employer can obtain from its
existing records through the exercise of reasonable diligence. This
paragraph does not require the host employer to make inspections of
worksite conditions to obtain this information.

    (C) Information about the design and operation of the host
employer's installation that the contract employer needs to make the
assessments required by this section; and

    Note to paragraph (a)(3)(i)(C): This paragraph requires the host
employer to obtain information about the design and operation of its
installation that contract employers need to make required
assessments if it does not have this information in existing
records.

    (D) Any other information about the design and operation of the
host employer's installation that is known by the host employer, that
the contract employer requests, and that is related to the protection
of the contract employer's employees.

    Note to paragraph (a)(3)(i)(D): For the purposes of this
paragraph, the host employer need only provide information to
contract employers that the host employer can obtain from its
existing records through the exercise of reasonable diligence. This
paragraph does not require the host employer to make inspections of
worksite conditions to obtain this information.

    (ii) Contract employers shall comply with the following
requirements:
    (A) The contract employer shall ensure that each of its employees
is instructed in the hazardous conditions relevant to the employee's
work that the contract employer is aware of as a result of information
communicated to the contract employer by the host employer under
paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section.
    (B) Before work begins, the contract employer shall advise the host
employer of any unique hazardous conditions presented by the contract
employer's work.
    (C) The contract employer shall advise the host employer of any
unanticipated hazardous conditions found during the contract employer's