[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 27, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44932-44942]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18377]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2018-0013]

Salini-Impregilo/Healy Joint Venture; Application for Permanent
Variance and Interim Order; Grant of Interim Order; Request for
Comments

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of Salini-
Impregilo/Healy Joint Venture for a Permanent Variance and Interim
Order from provisions of OSHA standards that regulate work in
compressed air environments and presents the agency's preliminary
finding to grant the Permanent Variance. OSHA also announces the
granting of an Interim Order. OSHA invites the public to submit
comments on the variance application to assist the agency in
determining whether to grant the applicant a Permanent Variance based
on the conditions specified in this application.

DATES: Submit comments, information, documents in response to this
notice, and request for a hearing on or before September 26, 2019. The
Interim Order described in this notice will become effective on August
27, 2019, and shall remain in effect until the completion of the
Northeast Boundary Tunnel project for Washington, DC or the Interim
Order is modified or revoked.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at: http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2018-0013,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Docket Office's normal business hours, 10:00 a.m.
to 3:00 p.m., ET.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2018-0013). All comments, including any personal
information you provide, are placed in the public docket without
change, and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection at the
OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Kevin Robinson, Director
Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities (OTPCA) at the
below address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone:
(202) 693-2110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Copies of this Federal Register notice. Electronic copies of this
Federal Register notice are available at http://www.regulations.gov.
This Federal Register notice, as well as news releases and other
relevant information, also are available at OSHA's web page at http://www.osha.gov.
    Hearing requests. According to 29 CFR 1905.15, hearing requests
must include: (1) A short and plain statement detailing how the
proposed Variance would affect the requesting party; (2) a
specification of any statement or representation in the Variance
application that the commenter denies, and a concise summary of the
evidence offered in support of each denial; and (3) any views or
arguments on any issue of fact or law presented in the variance
application.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of Application

    OSHA's standards in subpart S of 29 CFR part 1926 govern
underground construction, caissons, cofferdams, and compressed air. On
October 19, 2017, Salini-Impregilo/Healy Joint Venture (``Salini'' or
``the applicant''), 2600 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20003,
submitted under Section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (OSH Act; 29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1905.11 (variances and
other relief under section 6(d)) an application for a Permanent
Variance from several provisions of the OSHA standard that regulates
work in compressed air, 1926.803 of subpart S, and an Interim Order
allowing it to proceed while OSHA considers the request for a Permanent
Variance (OSHA-2018-0013-0001). This notice addresses Salini's
application for a Permanent Variance and Interim Order for construction
of the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project in Washington, DC only and is
not applicable to future Salini or Salini-related joint venture
tunneling projects.
    Specifically, this notice addresses Salini's application for a
Permanent Variance and Interim Order from the provisions of the
standard that: (1) Require the use of the decompression values
specified in decompression tables in Appendix A of subpart S (29 CFR
1926.803(f)(1)); and (2) require the use of automated operational
controls and a special decompression chamber (29 CFR
1926.803(g)(1)(iii) and (xvii), respectively).
    OSHA has previously approved nearly identical provisions when
granting several other very similar variances, as discussed in more
detail in Section II. OSHA preliminarily concludes that the proposed
variance is appropriate, grants an Interim Order temporarily allowing
the proposed activity, and seeks comment on the proposed variance.

Background

    The applicant is a contractor that works on complex tunnel projects
using innovations in tunnel-excavation methods. The applicant's workers
engage in the construction of tunnels using advanced shielded
mechanical excavation techniques in conjunction with an earth pressure
balanced micro-tunnel boring machine (EPBMTBM). Using shielded
mechanical excavation techniques, in conjunction with precast concrete
tunnel liners and backfill grout, EPBMTBMs provide methods to achieve
the face pressures required to maintain a stabilized tunnel face
through various geologies, and isolate that pressure to the forward
section (the working chamber) of the EPBMTBM.
    Salini asserts that generally it bores tunnels using an EPBMTBM at
levels below the water table through soft soils consisting of clay,
silt, and sand. EPBMTBMs are capable of maintaining pressure at the
tunnel face, and stabilizing existing geological conditions, through
the controlled use of propel cylinders, a mechanically driven cutter
head, bulkheads within the shield, ground-treatment foam, and a screw
conveyor that moves excavated material from the working chamber. The
forward-most portion of the EPBMTBM is the working chamber, and this
chamber is the only pressurized segment of the EPBMTBM. Within the
shield, the working chamber consists of two sections: The forward
working chamber and the staging chamber. The forward working chamber is
immediately behind the cutter head and tunnel face. The staging chamber
is behind the forward working chamber and between the man-lock door and
the entry door to the forward working chamber.
    The EPBMTBM has twin man-locks located between the pressurized
working chamber and the non-pressurized portion of the machine. Each
man-lock has two compartments. This configuration allows workers to
access the man-locks for compression and decompression, and medical
personnel to access the man-locks if required in an emergency.
    The applicant will pressurize the working chamber to the level
required to maintain a stable tunnel face, which for this project
Salini estimates will be up to a pressure not exceeding 50 pounds per
square in gauge (p.s.i.g.).\1\ Pressure in the staging chamber ranges
from atmospheric (no increased pressure) to a maximum pressure equal to
the pressure in the forward working chamber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The applicant originally requested a Variance to work up to
pressures not exceeding 58 p.s.i.g., which would have exceeded
OSHA's prohibition on pressures that exceed 50 p.s.i.g. (29 CFR
1926.803(e)(5)). The application was amended to estimate that will
be up to pressure not exceeding 50 p.s.i.g. The revision to the
application can be found in the docket at OSHA-2018-003-0004.
    The decompression tables in Appendix A of subpart S of part 1926
express the maximum working pressures as pounds per square inch
gauge (p.s.i.g.), with a maximum working pressure of 50 p.s.i.g.
Therefore, throughout this notice, OSHA expresses the 50 p.s.i.
value specified by Sec.  1926.803(e)(5) as 50 p.s.i.g., consistent
with the terminology in Appendix A, Table 1 of subpart S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Salini employs specially trained personnel for the construction of
the tunnel. To keep the machinery working effectively, Salini asserts
that these workers must periodically enter the excavation working
chamber of the EPBMTBM to perform hyperbaric interventions during which
workers would be exposed to air pressures up to 50 p.s.i.g., which does
not exceed the maximum pressure specified by the existing OSHA standard
at 29 CFR 1926.803(e)(5). These interventions consist of conducting
inspections or maintenance work on the cutter-head structure and
cutting tools of the EPBMTBM, such as changing replaceable cutting
tools and disposable wear bars, and, in rare cases, repairing
structural damage to the cutter head. These interventions are the only
time that workers are exposed to compressed air. Interventions in the
working chamber (the pressurized portion of the EPBMTBM) take place
only after halting tunnel excavation and preparing the machine and crew
for an intervention.
    During interventions, workers enter the working chamber through one
of the twin man-locks that open into the staging chamber. To reach the
forward part of the working chamber, workers pass through a door in a
bulkhead that separates the staging chamber from the forward working
chamber. The manlocks and the working chamber are designed to
accommodate three people, which is the maximum crew size allowed under
the proposed variance. When the required decompression times are
greater than work times, the twin man-locks allow for crew rotation.

During crew rotation, one crew can be compressing or decompressing
while the second crew is working. Therefore, the working crew always
has an unoccupied man-lock at its disposal.
    Salini asserts that these innovations in tunnel excavation have
greatly reduced worker exposure to hazards of pressurized air work
because they have eliminated the need to pressurize the entire tunnel
for the project and would thereby reduce the number of workers exposed,
as well as the total duration of exposure, to hyperbaric pressure
during tunnel construction. These advances in technology substantially
modified the methods used by the construction industry to excavate
subaqueous tunnels compared to the caisson work regulated by the
current OSHA compressed-air standard for construction at 29 CFR
1926.803.
    In addition to the reduced exposures resulting from the innovations
in tunnel-excavation methods, Salini asserts that innovations in
hyperbaric medicine and technology improve the safety of decompression
from hyperbaric exposures. These procedures, however, would deviate
from the decompression process that OSHA requires for construction in
29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1) and the decompression tables in Appendix A of 29
CFR 1926, subpart S. Nevertheless, according to Salini, their use of
decompression protocols incorporating oxygen is more efficient,
effective, and safer for tunnel workers than compliance with the
decompression tables specified by the existing OSHA standard.
    Salini therefore believes its workers will be at least as safe
under its proposed alternatives as they would be under OSHA's standard
because of the reduction in number of workers and duration of
hyperbaric exposures, better application of hyperbaric medicine, and
the development of a project-specific Hyperbaric Operations Manual
(HOM) that requires specialized medical support and hyperbaric
supervision to provide assistance to a team of specially trained man-
lock attendants and hyperbaric or compressed-air workers (CAWs).
    Based on an initial review of Salini's application for a Permanent
Variance and Interim Order for the construction of the Northeast
Boundary Tunnel Project in Washington, DC, OSHA has preliminarily
determined that Salini proposed an alternative that would provide a
workplace at least as safe and healthful as that provided by the
standard.

II. The Variance Application

    Pursuant to the requirements of OSHA's variance regulations, the
applicant certifies that it provided employee representatives of
affected workers with a copy of the variance application.\2\ The
applicant also certifies that it notified its workers of the variance
application by posting, at prominent locations where it normally posts
workplace notices, a summary of the application and information
specifying where the workers can examine a copy of the application. In
addition, the applicant informed its workers and their representatives
of their rights to petition the Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health for a hearing on the variance
application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See the definition of ``Affected employee or worker'' in
section V. D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. OSHA History of Approval of Nearly Identical Variance Requests

    OSHA has previously approved several nearly identical variances
involving the same types of tunneling equipment used for similar
projects. OSHA notes that it granted three subaqueous tunnel
construction Permanent Variances from the same provisions of OSHA's
compressed-air standard (29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1), (g)(1)(iii), and
(g)(1)(xvii)) that are the subject of the present application: (1)
Impregilo, Healy, Parsons, Joint Venture (IHP JV) for the completion of
the Annacostia River Tunnel in Washington, DC (80 FR 50652 (August 20,
2015)); (2) Traylor JV for the completion of the Blue Plains Tunnel in
Washington, DC (80 FR 16440 (March 27, 2015)); and (3) Tully/OHL USA
Joint Venture for the completion of the New York Economic Development
Corporation's New York Siphon Tunnel project (79 FR 29809) (May 23,
2014)). The proposed alternate conditions in this notice are nearly
identical to the alternate conditions of the previous Permanent
Variances.\3\ OSHA is not aware of any injuries or other safety issues
that arose from work performed under these conditions in accordance
with the previous variances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The other variances allowed further deviation from OSHA
standards by permitting employee exposures above 50 p.s.i.g. based
on the composition of the soil and the amount of water that will be
above the tunnel for various sections of this project. The current
proposed variance includes substantively the same safeguards as the
variances that OSHA granted previously even though employees will
not be exposed to the higher pressures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Variance From Paragraph (f)(1) of 29 CFR 1926.803, Requirement To
Use OSHA Decompression Tables

    OSHA's compressed-air standard for construction requires
decompression in accordance with the decompression tables in Appendix A
of 29 CFR 1926, subpart S (see 29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1)). As an
alternative to the OSHA decompression tables, the applicant proposes to
use newer decompression schedules (the 1992 French Decompression
Tables) that rely on staged decompression and supplement breathing air
used during decompression with air or oxygen (as appropriate).\4\ The
applicant asserts decompression protocols using the 1992 French
Decompression Tables for air or oxygen as specified by the Northeast
Boundary Tunnel Project-specific HOM are safer for tunnel workers than
the decompression protocols specified in Appendix A of 29 CFR 1926,
subpart S. Accordingly, the applicant would commit to following the
decompression procedures described in that HOM, which would require it
to follow the 1992 French Decompression Tables to decompress
compressed-air worker (CAWs) after they exit the hyperbaric conditions
in the working chamber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In 1992, the French Ministry of Labour replaced the 1974
French Decompression Tables with the 1992 French Decompression
Tables, which differ from OSHA's decompression tables in Appendix A
by using: (1) Staged decompression as opposed to continuous (linear)
decompression; (2) decompression tables based on air or both air and
pure oxygen; and (3) emergency tables when unexpected exposure times
occur (up to 30 minutes above the maximum allowed working time).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Depending on the maximum working pressure and exposure times, the
1992 French Decompression Tables provide for air decompression with or
without oxygen. Salini asserts that oxygen decompression has many
benefits, including (1) keeping the partial pressure of nitrogen in the
lungs as low as possible; (2) keeping external pressure as low as
possible to reduce the formation of bubbles in the blood; (3) removing
nitrogen from the lungs and arterial blood and increasing the rate of
nitrogen elimination; (4) improving the quality of breathing during
decompression stops so that workers are less tired and to prevent bone
necrosis; (5) reducing decompression time by about 33 percent as
compared to air decompression; and (6) reducing inflammation.
    In addition, the project-specific HOM requires a physician
certified in hyperbaric medicine to manage the medical condition of
CAWs during hyperbaric exposures and decompression. A trained and

experienced man-lock attendant is also required to be present during
hyperbaric exposures and decompression. This man-lock attendant is to
operate the hyperbaric system to ensure compliance with the specified
decompression table. A hyperbaric supervisor (competent person), who is
trained in hyperbaric operations, procedures, and safety, directly
oversees all hyperbaric interventions and ensures that staff follow the
procedures delineated in the HOM or by the attending physician.

C. Variance From Paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of 29 CFR 1926.803,
Automatically Regulated Continuous Decompression

    The applicant is applying for a Permanent Variance from the OSHA
standard at 29 CFR 1926.803(g)(1)(iii), which requires automatic
controls to regulate decompression. As noted above, the applicant is
committed to conducting the staged decompression according to the 1992
French Decompression Tables under the direct control of the trained
man-lock attendant and under the oversight of the hyperbaric
supervisor.
    Breathing air under hyperbaric conditions increases the amount of
nitrogen gas dissolved in a CAW's tissues. The greater the hyperbaric
pressure under these conditions and the more time spent under the
increased pressure, the greater the amount of nitrogen gas dissolved in
the tissues. When the pressure decreases during decompression, tissues
release the dissolved nitrogen gas into the blood system, which then
carries the nitrogen gas to the lungs for elimination through
exhalation. Releasing hyperbaric pressure too rapidly during
decompression can increase the size of the bubbles formed by nitrogen
gas in the blood system, resulting in decompression illness (DCI),
commonly referred to as ``the bends.'' This description of the etiology
of DCI is consistent with current scientific theory and research on the
issue (see footnote 12 in this notice discussing a 1985 NIOSH report on
DCI).
    The 1992 French Decompression Tables proposed for use by the
applicant provide for stops during worker decompression (i.e., staged
decompression) to control the release of nitrogen gas from tissues into
the blood system. Studies show that staged decompression, in
combination with other features of the 1992 French Decompression Tables
such as the use of oxygen, result in a lower incidence of DCI than the
use of automatically regulated continuous decompression.\5\ In
addition, the applicant asserts that staged decompression administered
in accordance with its HMO is at least as effective as an automatic
controller in regulating the decompression process because the HMO
includes a hyperbaric supervisor (a competent person experienced and
trained in hyperbaric operations, procedures, and safety) who directly
supervises all hyperbaric interventions and ensures that the man-lock
attendant, who is a competent person in the manual control of
hyperbaric systems, follows the schedule specified in the decompression
tables, including stops.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., Dr. Eric Kindwall, EP (1997), Compressed air
tunneling and caisson work decompression procedures: Development,
problems, and solutions. Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine, 24(4),
pp. 337-345. This article reported 60 treated cases of DCI among
4,168 exposures between 19 and 31 p.s.i.g. over a 51-week contract
period, for a DCI incidence of 1.44% for the decompression tables
specified by the OSHA standard. Dr. Kindwall notes that the use of
automatically regulated continuous decompression in the Washington
State safety standards for compressed-air work (from which OSHA
derived its decompression tables) was at the insistence of
contractors and the union, and against the advice of the expert who
calculated the decompression table and recommended using staged
decompression. Dr. Kindwall then states, ``Continuous decompression
is inefficient and wasteful. For example, if the last stage from 4
p.s.i.g. . . . to the surface took 1h, at least half the time is
spent at pressures less than 2 p.s.i.g. . . . , which provides less
and less meaningful bubble suppression . . . .'' In addition, Dr.
Kindwall addresses the continuous-decompression protocol in the OSHA
compressed-air standard for construction, noting that ``[a]side from
the tables for saturation diving to deep depths, no other widely
used or officially approved diving decompression tables use straight
line, continuous decompressions at varying rates. Stage
decompression is usually the rule, since it is simpler to control.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Variance From Paragraph (g)(1)(xvii) of 29 CFR 1926.803, Requirement
of Special Decompression Chamber

    The OSHA compressed-air standard for construction requires
employers to use a special decompression chamber of sufficient size to
accommodate all CAWs being decompressed at the end of the shift when
total decompression time exceeds 75 minutes (see 29 CFR
1926.803(g)(1)(xvii)). Use of the special decompression chamber enables
CAWs to move about and flex their joints to prevent neuromuscular
problems during decompression.
    Space limitations in the EPBMTBM do not allow for the installation
and use of an additional special decompression lock or chamber. The
applicant proposes that it be permitted to rely on the man-locks and
staging chamber in lieu of adding a separate, special decompression
chamber. Because only a few workers out of the entire crew are exposed
to hyperbaric pressure, the man-locks (which, as noted earlier, connect
directly to the working chamber) and the staging chamber are of
sufficient size to accommodate all of the exposed workers during
decompression. The applicant uses the existing man-locks, each of which
adequately accommodates a three-member crew for this purpose when
decompression lasts up to 75 minutes. When decompression exceeds 75
minutes, crews can open the door connecting the two compartments in
each man-lock (during decompression stops) or exit the man-lock and
move into the staging chamber where additional space is available. The
applicant asserts that this alternative arrangement is as effective as
a special decompression chamber in that it has sufficient space for all
the CAWs at the end of a shift and enables the CAWs to move about and
flex their joints to prevent neuromuscular problems.

III. Agency Preliminary Determinations

    After reviewing the proposed alternatives OSHA preliminarily
determined that the applicants proposed alternatives on the whole,
subject to the conditions in the request and imposed by this Interim
Order, provide measures that are as safe and healthful as those
required by the cited OSHA standards addressed in section II of this
document.
    In addition, OSHA has preliminarily determined that each of the
following alternatives are at least as effective as the specified OSHA
requirements:

A. 29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1)

    Salini has proposed to implement, equally effective alternative
measures to the requirement in 29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1) for compliance
with OSHA's decompression tables. The HOM specifies the procedures and
personnel qualifications for performing work safely during the
compression and decompression phases of interventions. The HOM also
specifies the decompression tables the applicant proposes to use (the
1992 French Decompression Tables). Depending on the maximum working
pressure and exposure times during the interventions, the tables
provide for decompression using air, pure oxygen, or a combination of
air and oxygen. The decompression tables also include delays or stops
for various time intervals at different pressure levels during the
transition to atmospheric pressure (i.e., staged decompression). In all
cases, a physician certified in hyperbaric medicine will manage the
medical condition of CAWs during decompression. In addition, a trained
and experienced man-lock attendant,

experienced in recognizing decompression sickness or illnesses and
injuries, will be present. Of key importance, a hyperbaric supervisor
(competent person), trained in hyperbaric operations, procedures, and
safety, will directly supervise all hyperbaric operations to ensure
compliance with the procedures delineated in the project-specific HOM
or by the attending physician.
    As it did when granting the three previous variances to IHP JV,
Traylor JV, and Tully JV, OSHA conducted a review of the scientific
literature and concluded that the alternative decompression method
(i.e., the 1992 French Decompression Tables) Salini proposed would be
at least as safe as the decompression tables specified by OSHA when
applied by trained medical personnel under the conditions that would be
imposed by the proposed variance.
    Some of the literature even indicates that it may be safer,
concluding that decompression performed in accordance with these tables
resulted in a lower occurrence of DCI than decompression conducted in
accordance with the decompression tables specified by the standard. For
example, H.L. Anderson studied the occurrence of DCI at maximum
hyperbaric pressures ranging from 4 p.s.i.g. to 43 p.s.i.g. during
construction of the Great Belt Tunnel in Denmark (1992-1996).\6\ This
project used the 1992 French Decompression Tables to decompress the
workers during part of the construction. Anderson observed 6 DCI cases
out of 7,220 decompression events, and reported that switching to the
1992 French Decompression tables reduced the DCI incidence to 0.08%
compared to a previous incidence rate of 0.14%. The DCI incidence in
the study by H.L. Andersen is substantially less than the DCI incidence
reported for the decompression tables specified in Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Anderson HL (2002). Decompression sickness during
construction of the Great Belt tunnel, Denmark. Undersea and
Hyperbaric Medicine, 29(3), pp. 172-188.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA found no studies in which the DCI incidence reported for the
1992 French Decompression Tables were higher than the DCI incidence
reported for the OSHA decompression tables.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Le P[eacute]chon JC, Barre P, Baud JP, Ollivier F (September
1996). Compressed air work--French Tables 1992--operational results.
JCLP Hyperbarie Paris, Centre Medical Subaquatique Interentreprise,
Marseille: Communication a l'EUBS, pp. 1-5 (see Ex. OSHA-2012-0036-
0005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA's experience with the previous three variances, which all
incorporated nearly identical decompression plans and did not result in
safety issues, also provides evidence that the alternative procedure as
a whole is at least as effective for this type of tunneling project as
compliance with OSHA's decompression tables. The experience of State
Plans \8\ that either granted variances (Nevada, Oregon and Washington)
\9\ or promulgated a new standard (California) \10\ for hyperbaric
exposures occurring during similar subaqueous tunnel-construction work,
provide additional evidence of the effectiveness of this alternative
procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Under Section 18 of the OSH Act, Congress expressly provides
that States and U.S. territories may adopt, with Federal approval, a
plan for the development and enforcement of occupational safety and
health standards. OSHA refers to such States and territories as
``State Plan States'' 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 (29 U.S.C. 667).
    \9\ These state variances are available in the docket for the
2015 Traylor JV variance: Exs. OSHA-2012-0035-0006 (Nevada), OSHA-
2012-0035-0005 (Oregon), and OSHA-2012-0035-0004 (Washington).
    \10\ See California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Subchapter 7,
Group 26, Article 154, available at http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb7g26a154.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. 29 CFR 1926.803(g)(1)(xvii)

    Salini developed, and proposed to implement, an equally effective
alternative to 29 CFR 1926.803(g)(1)(xvii), which requires the use of
automatic controllers that continuously decrease pressure to achieve
decompression in accordance with the tables specified by the standard.
The applicant's alternative includes using the 1992 French
Decompression Tables for guiding staged decompression to achieve lower
occurrences of DCI, using a trained and competent attendant for
implementing appropriate hyperbaric entry and exit procedures, and
providing a competent hyperbaric supervisor and attending physician
certified in hyperbaric medicine, to oversee all hyperbaric operations.
    In reaching this preliminary conclusion, OSHA again notes the
experience of previous nearly identical tunneling variances, the
experiences of State Plan States, and a review of the literature and
other information noted earlier.

C. 29 CFR 1926.803(g)(1)(xvii)

    Salini developed, and proposed to implement, an effective
alternative to the use of the special decompression chamber required by
29 CFR 1926.803(g)(1)(xvii). The EPBMTBM's man-lock and working chamber
appear to satisfy all of the conditions of the special decompression
chamber, including that they provide sufficient space for the maximum
crew of three CAWs to stand up and move around, and safely accommodate
decompression times up to 360 minutes.\11\ Therefore, again noting
OSHA's previous experience with nearly identical variances including
the same alternative, OSHA preliminarily determined that the EPBMTBM's
man-lock and working chamber function as effectively as the special
decompression chamber required by the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As part of the HOM, Salini submitted a letter from Dr.
Tommy Love MD, asserting the safe accommodation of decompression
times up to 360 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655), and based on the record discussed above, the
agency preliminarily finds that when the employer complies with the
conditions of the previously granted Interim Order, or the conditions
of the proposed variance, the working conditions of the employer's
workers would be at least as safe and healthful as if the employer
complied with the working conditions specified by paragraphs (e)(5),
(f)(1), (g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(xvii) of 29 CFR 1926.803.

IV. Grant of Interim Order, Proposal for Permanent Variance, and
Request for Comment

    OSHA hereby announces the preliminary decision to grant an Interim
Order allowing Salini's CAWs to perform interventions in hyperbaric
conditions not exceeding 50 p.s.i.g. during the Northeast Boundary
Tunnel Project, subject to the conditions that follow in this document.
This Interim Order will remain in effect until completion of the
Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project or until the agency modifies or
revokes the Interim Order or makes a decision on Salini's application
for a Permanent Variance. During the period starting with the
publication of this notice until completion of the Northeast Boundary
Tunnel, or until the agency modifies or revokes the Interim Order or
makes a decision on its application for a Permanent Variance, the
applicant is required to comply fully with the conditions of the
Interim Order as an alternative to complying with the following
requirements of 29 CFR 1926.803 (hereafter, ``the standard'') that:
    1. Require the use of decompression values specified by the
decompression tables in Appendix A of the

compressed-air standard (29 CFR 1926.803(f)(1));
    2. Require the use of automated operational controls (29 CFR
1926.803(g)(1)(iii)); and
    3. Require the use of a special decompression chamber
(1926.803(g)(1)(xvii)).
    In order to avail itself of the Interim Order, Salini must: (1)
Comply with the conditions listed in the Interim Order for the period
starting with the grant of the Interim Order and ending with Salini's
completion of the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project (or until the
agency modifies or revokes the Interim Order or makes a decision on its
application for a Permanent Variance); (2) comply fully with all other
applicable provisions of 29 CFR part 1926; and (3) provide a copy of
this Federal Register notice to all employees affected by the proposed
conditions, including the affected employees of other employers, using
the same means it used to inform these employees of its application for
a Permanent Variance.
    OSHA is also proposing that the same requirements (see above
section IV, parts A through C) would apply to a Permanent Variance if
OSHA ultimately issues one for this project. OSHA requests comment on
those conditions as well as OSHA's preliminary determination that the
specified alternatives and conditions would provide a workplace as safe
and healthful as those required by the standard from which a variance
is sought. After reviewing comments, OSHA will publish in the Federal
Register the agency's final decision approving or rejecting the request
for a Permanent Variance.

V. Description of the Specified Conditions of the Interim Order and the
Application for a Permanent Variance

    This section describes the alternative means of compliance with 29
CFR 1926.803(f)(1), (g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(xvii) and provides
additional detail regarding the proposed conditions that form the basis
of Salini's application for an Interim Order and for a Permanent
Variance. The conditions are listed in Section VI. For brevity, the
discussion that follows refers only to the Permanent Variance, but the
same conditions apply to the Interim Order.

Proposed Condition A: Scope

    The scope of the proposed Permanent Variance would limit coverage
to the work situations specified. Clearly defining the scope of the
proposed Permanent Variance provides Salini, Salini's employees,
potential future applicants, other stakeholders, the public, and OSHA
with necessary information regarding the work situations in which the
proposed Permanent Variance would apply. To the extent that Salini
exceeds the defined scope of this variance, it would be required to
comply with OSHA's standards.
    Pursuant to 29 CFR 1905.11, an employer (or class or group of
employers) \12\ may request a Permanent Variance for a specific
workplace or workplaces. If OSHA approves a Permanent Variance, it
would apply only to the specific employer(s) that submitted the
application and only to the specific workplace or workplaces designated
as part of the project. In this instance, if OSHA were to grant a
Permanent Variance, it would apply to only the applicant, Salini-
Impregilo/Healy JV and only the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project. As a
result, it is important to understand that if OSHA were to grant Salini
a Permanent Variance, it would not apply to any other employers, such
as other joint ventures the applicant may undertake in the future.
However, 29 CFR 1905.13 does contain provisions for future modification
of Permanent Variances to add or include additional employers if future
joint ventures are established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A class or group of employers (such as members of a trade
alliance or association) may apply jointly for a Variance provided
an authorized representative for each employer signs the application
and the application identifies each employer's affected facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Condition B: Duration

    The Interim Order is only intended as a temporary measure pending
OSHA's decision on the Permanent Variance, so this condition specifies
the duration of the Order. If OSHA approves a Permanent Variance, it
would specify the duration of the Permanent Variance as the remainder
of the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project.

Proposed Condition C: List of Abbreviations

    Proposed condition C defines a number of abbreviations used in the
proposed Permanent Variance. OSHA believes that defining these
abbreviations serves to clarify and standardize their usage, thereby
enhancing the applicant's and its employees' understanding of the
conditions specified by the proposed Permanent Variance.

Proposed Condition D: Definitions

    The proposed condition defines a series of terms, mostly technical
terms, used in the proposed Permanent Variance to standardize and
clarify their meaning. Defining these terms serves to enhance the
applicant's and its employees' understanding of the conditions
specified by the proposed Permanent Variance.

Proposed Condition E: Safety and Health Practices

    This proposed condition requires the applicant to develop and
submit to OSHA an HOM specific to the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project
at least six months before using the EPBMTBM for tunneling operations.
The applicant must also submit, at least six months before using the
EPBMTBM, proof that the EPBMTBM's hyperbaric chambers have been
designed, fabricated, inspected, tested, marked, and stamped in
accordance with the requirements of ASME PVHO-1.2012 (or the most
recent edition of Safety Standards for Pressure Vessels for Human
Occupancy). These requirements ensure that the applicant develops
hyperbaric safety and health procedures suitable for the project.
    The submission of the HOM to OSHA, which Salini has already
completed, enables OSHA to determine whether the safety and health
instructions and measures it specifies are appropriate to the field
conditions of the tunnel (including expected geological conditions),
conform to the conditions of the variance, and adequately protect the
safety and health of the CAWs. It also facilitates OSHA's ability to
ensure that the applicant is complying with these instructions and
measures. The requirement for proof of compliance with ASME PVHO-1.2012
is intended to ensure that the equipment is structurally sound and
capable of performing to protect the safety of the employees exposed to
hyperbaric pressure.
    Additionally, the proposed condition includes a series of related
hazard prevention and control requirements and methods (e.g.,
decompression tables, job hazard analyses (JHA), operations and
inspections checklists, incident investigation, and recording and
notification to OSHA of recordable hyperbaric injuries and illnesses)
designed to ensure the continued effective functioning of the
hyperbaric equipment and operating system.

Proposed Condition F: Communication

    This proposed condition requires the applicant to develop and
implement an effective system of information sharing and communication.
Effective information sharing and communication are intended to ensure
that affected workers receive updated information regarding any safety-
related hazards and incidents, and corrective actions taken,

prior to the start of each shift. The proposed condition also requires
the applicant to ensure that reliable means of emergency communications
are available and maintained for affected workers and support personnel
during hyperbaric operations. Availability of such reliable means of
communications would enable affected workers and support personnel to
respond quickly and effectively to hazardous conditions or emergencies
that may develop during EPBMTBM operations.

Proposed Condition G: Worker Qualification and Training

    This proposed condition requires the applicant to develop and
implement an effective qualification and training program for affected
workers. The proposed condition specifies the factors that an affected
worker must know to perform safely during hyperbaric operations,
including how to enter, work in, and exit from hyperbaric conditions
under both normal and emergency conditions. Having well-trained and
qualified workers performing hyperbaric intervention work is intended
to ensure that they recognize, and respond appropriately to, hyperbaric
safety and health hazards. These qualification and training
requirements enable affected workers to cope effectively with
emergencies, as well as the discomfort and physiological effects of
hyperbaric exposure, thereby preventing worker injury, illness, and
fatalities.
    Paragraph (2)(e) of this proposed condition requires the applicant
to provide affected workers with information they can use to contact
the appropriate healthcare professionals if the workers believe they
are developing hyperbaric-related health effects. This requirement
provides for early intervention and treatment of DCI and other health
effects resulting from hyperbaric exposure, thereby reducing the
potential severity of these effects.

Proposed Condition H: Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention

    Proposed Condition H requires the applicant to develop, implement,
and operate a program of frequent and regular inspections of the
EPBMTBM's hyperbaric equipment and support systems, and associated work
areas. This condition would help to ensure the safe operation and
physical integrity of the equipment and work areas necessary to conduct
hyperbaric operations. The condition would also enhance worker safety
by reducing the risk of hyperbaric-related emergencies.
    Paragraph (3) of this proposed condition requires the applicant to
document tests, inspections, corrective actions, and repairs involving
the EPBMTBM, and maintain these documents at the jobsite for the
duration of the job. This requirement would provide the applicant with
information needed to schedule tests and inspections to ensure the
continued safe operation of the equipment and systems, and to determine
that the actions taken to correct defects in hyperbaric equipment and
systems were appropriate, prior to returning them to service.

Proposed Condition I: Compression and Decompression

    This proposed condition would require the applicant to consult with
the designated medical advisor regarding special compression or
decompression procedures appropriate for any unacclimated CAW and then
implement the procedures recommended by the medical consultant. This
proposed provision would ensure that the applicant consults with the
medical advisor, and involves the medical advisor in the evaluation,
development, and implementation of compression or decompression
protocols appropriate for any CAW requiring acclimation to the
hyperbaric conditions encountered during EPBMTBM operations.
Accordingly, CAWs requiring acclimation would have an opportunity to
acclimate prior to exposure to these hyperbaric conditions. OSHA
believes this condition would prevent or reduce adverse reactions among
CAWs to the effects of compression or decompression associated with the
intervention work they perform in the EPBMTBM.

Proposed Condition J: Recordkeeping

    Under OSHA's existing recordkeeping requirements in 29 CFR part
1904 regarding Recording and Reporting Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses, Salini must maintain a record of any recordable injury,
illness, or fatality (as defined by 29 CFR part 1904) resulting from
exposure of an employee to hyperbaric conditions by completing the OSHA
Form 301 Incident Report and OSHA Form 300 Log of Work Related Injuries
and Illnesses. The applicant did not seek a variance from this standard
and therefore must comply fully with those requirements.
    Examples of important information to include on the OSHA Form 301
Injury and Illness Incident Report (along with the corresponding
question on the form) are:
Q14
 the task performed;
 the composition of the gas mixture (e.g., air or oxygen);
 an estimate of the CAW's workload;
 the maximum working pressure;
 temperature in the work and decompression environments;
 unusual occurrences, if any, during the task or decompression
Q15
 time of symptom onset;
 duration between decompression and onset of symptoms
Q16
 type and duration of symptoms;
 a medical summary of the illness or injury
Q17
 duration of the hyperbaric intervention;
 possible contributing factors;
 the number of prior interventions completed by the injured or
ill CAW; and the pressure to which the CAW was exposed during those
interventions.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 29 CFR 1904 Recording and Reporting Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses (http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9631); recordkeeping
forms and instructions (http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/RKform300pkg-fillable-enabled.pdf); and OSHA Recordkeeping Handbook
(http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/handbook/index.html).

    Proposed Condition J would add additional reporting
responsibilities, beyond those already required by the OSHA standard.
The applicant would be required to maintain records of specific factors
associated with each hyperbaric intervention. The information gathered
and recorded under this provision, in concert with the information
provided under proposed Condition K (using OSHA Form 301 Injury and
Illness Incident Report to investigate and record hyperbaric recordable
injuries as defined by 29 CFR 1904.4, 1904.7, 1904.8-1904.12), would
enable the applicant and OSHA to assess the effectiveness of the
Permanent Variance in preventing DCI and other hyperbaric-related
effects.

Proposed Condition K: Notifications

    Under the proposed condition, the applicant is required, within
specified periods of time, to notify OSHA of: (1) Any recordable
injury, illness, in-patient hospitalization, amputation, loss of an
eye, or fatality that occurs as a result of hyperbaric exposures during
EPBMTBM operations; (2) provide OSHA a copy of the hyperbaric exposures
incident investigation report (using OSHA Form 301 Injury and Illness
Incident Report) of these events

within 24 hours of the incident; (3) include on OSHA Form 301 Injury
and Illness Incident Report information on the hyperbaric conditions
associated with the recordable injury or illness, the root-cause
determination, and preventive and corrective actions identified and
implemented; (4) provide the certification that affected workers were
informed of the incident and the results of the incident investigation;
(5) notify OSHA's Office of Technical Programs and Coordination
Activities (OTPCA) and the Baltimore/Washington DC OSHA Area Office
(BWAO) within 15 working days should the applicant need to revise the
HOM to accommodate changes in its compressed-air operations that affect
Salini's ability to comply with the conditions of the proposed
Permanent Variance; and (6) provide OTPCA and the BWAO, at the end of
the project, with a report evaluating the effectiveness of the
decompression tables.
    It should be noted that the requirement for completing and
submitting the hyperbaric exposure-related (recordable) incident
investigation report (OSHA 301 Injury and Illness Incident Report) is
more restrictive than the current recordkeeping requirement of
completing OSHA Form 301 Injury and Illness Incident Report within 7
calendar days of the incident (1904.29(b)(3)). This modified, more
stringent incident investigation and reporting requirement is
restricted to intervention-related hyperbaric (recordable) incidents
only. Providing rapid notification to OSHA is essential because time is
a critical element in OSHA's ability to determine the continued
effectiveness of the variance conditions in preventing hyperbaric
incidents, and the applicant's identification and implementation of
appropriate corrective and preventive actions.
    Further, these notification requirements also enable the applicant,
its employees, and OSHA to assess the effectiveness of the Permanent
Variance in providing the requisite level of safety to the applicant's
workers and, based on this assessment, whether to revise or revoke the
conditions of the proposed Permanent Variance. Timely notification
permits OSHA to take whatever action may be necessary and appropriate
to prevent possible further injuries and illnesses. Providing
notification to employees informs them of the precautions taken by the
applicant to prevent similar incidents in the future.
    Additionally, this proposed condition requires the applicant to
notify OSHA if it ceases to do business, has a new address or location
for the main office, or transfers the operations covered by the
proposed Permanent Variance to a successor company. In addition, the
condition specifies that the transfer of the Permanent Variance to a
successor company must be approved by OSHA. These requirements allow
OSHA to communicate effectively with the applicant regarding the status
of the proposed Permanent Variance, and expedite the agency's
administration and enforcement of the Permanent Variance. Stipulating
that an applicant is required to have OSHA's approval to transfer a
variance to a successor company provides assurance that the successor
company has knowledge of, and will comply with, the conditions
specified by proposed Permanent Variance, thereby ensuring the safety
of workers involved in performing the operations covered by the
proposed Permanent Variance.

VI. Specific Conditions of the Interim Order and the Proposed Permanent
Variance

    The following conditions apply to the Interim Order OSHA is
granting to Salini. These conditions specify the alternative means of
compliance with the requirements of paragraphs 29 CFR 1926.803 (f)(1),
(g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(xvii). In addition, these conditions are
specific to the alternative means of compliance with the requirements
of paragraphs 29 CFR 1926.803 (f)(1), (g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(xvii)
that OSHA is proposing for Salini's Permanent Variance. To simplify the
presentation of the conditions, OSHA generally refers only to the
conditions of the proposed Permanent Variance, but the same conditions
apply to the Interim Order except where otherwise noted.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In these conditions, OSHA is using the future conditional
form of the verb (e.g., ``would''), which pertains to the
application for a Permanent Variance (designated as ``Permanent
Variance'') but the conditions are mandatory for purposes of the
Interim Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The conditions would apply with respect to all employees of Salini
exposed to hyperbaric conditions. These conditions are outlined in this
Section:

A. Scope

    The Interim Order applies, and the Permanent Variance would apply,
only when Salini stops the tunnel-boring work, pressurizes the working
chamber, and the CAWs either enter the working chamber to perform an
intervention (i.e., inspect, maintain, or repair the mechanical-
excavation components), or exit the working chamber after performing
interventions.
    The Interim Order and Proposed Variance apply only to work:
    1. That occurs in conjunction with construction of the Northeast
Boundary Tunnel Project, a tunnel constructed using advanced shielded
mechanical-excavation techniques and involving operation of an EPBMTBM;
    2. In the EPBMTBM's forward section (the working chamber) and
associated hyperbaric chambers used to pressurize and decompress
employees entering and exiting the working chamber; and
    3. Performed in compliance with all applicable provisions of 29 CFR
part 1926 except for the requirements specified by 29 CFR
1926.803(f)(1), (g)(1)(iii), and (g)(1)(xvii).

B. Duration

    The Interim Order granted to Salini will remain in effect until
OSHA modifies or revokes this Interim Order or grants Salini's request
for a Permanent Variance in accordance with 29 CFR 1905.13. The
proposed Permanent Variance, if granted, would remain in effect until
the completion of Salini's Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project.

C. List of Abbreviations

    Abbreviations used throughout this proposed Permanent Variance
would include the following:
1. CAW--Compressed-air worker
2. CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
3. DCI--Decompression Illness
4. DMT--Diver Medical Technician
5. EPBMTBM--Earth Pressure Balanced Micro Tunnel Boring Machine
6. HOM--Hyperbaric Operations Manual
7. JHA--Job hazard analysis
8. OSHA--Occupational Safety and Health Administration
9. OTPCA--Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities

D. Definitions

    The following definitions would apply to this proposed Permanent
Variance. These definitions would supplement the definitions in
Salini's project-specific HOM.
    1. Affected employee or worker--an employee or worker who is
affected by the conditions of this proposed Permanent Variance, or any
one of his or her authorized representatives. The term ``employee'' has
the meaning defined and used under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).
    2. Atmospheric pressure--the pressure of air at sea level,
generally 14.7 pounds per square inch absolute (p.s.i.a)., 1 atmosphere
absolute, or 0 p.s.i.g.

    3. Compressed-air worker--an individual who is specially trained
and medically qualified to perform work in a pressurized environment
while breathing air at pressures not exceeding 50 p.s.i.g.
    4. Competent person--an individual who is capable of identifying
existing and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working
conditions that are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees,
and who has authorization to take prompt corrective measures to
eliminate them.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Adapted from 29 CFR 1926.32(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Decompression illness--an illness (also called decompression
sickness or ``the bends'') caused by gas bubbles appearing in body
compartments due to a reduction in ambient pressure. Examples of
symptoms of decompression illness include, but are not limited to:
Joint pain (also known as the ``bends'' for agonizing pain or the
``niggles'' for slight pain); areas of bone destruction (termed
dysbaric osteonecrosis); skin disorders (such as cutis marmorata, which
causes a pink marbling of the skin); spinal cord and brain disorders
(such as stroke, paralysis, paresthesia, and bladder dysfunction);
cardiopulmonary disorders, such as shortness of breath; and arterial
gas embolism (gas bubbles in the arteries that block blood flow).\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Appendix 10 of ``A Guide to the Work in Compressed-Air
Regulations 1996,'' published by the United Kingdom Health and
Safety Executive available from NIOSH at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/archive/pdfs/NIOSH-254/compReg1996.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note: Health effects associated with hyperbaric intervention, but
not considered symptoms of DCI, can include: Barotrauma (direct damage
to air-containing cavities in the body such as ears, sinuses, and
lungs); nitrogen narcosis (reversible alteration in consciousness that
may occur in hyperbaric environments and is caused by the anesthetic
effect of certain gases at high pressure); and oxygen toxicity (a
central nervous system condition resulting from the harmful effects of
breathing molecular oxygen (O2) at elevated partial
pressures).
    6. Diver Medical Technician--Member of the dive team who is
experienced in first aid.
    7. Earth Pressure Balanced Micro Tunnel Boring Machine--the
machinery used to excavate a tunnel.
    8. Hot work--any activity performed in a hazardous location that
may introduce an ignition source into a potentially flammable
atmosphere.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Also see 29 CFR 1910.146(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Hyperbaric--at a higher pressure than atmospheric pressure.
    10. Hyperbaric intervention--a term that describes the process of
stopping the EPBMTBM and preparing and executing work under hyperbaric
pressure in the working chamber for the purpose of inspecting,
replacing, or repairing cutting tools and/or the cutterhead structure.
    11. Hyperbaric Operations Manual--a detailed, project-specific
health and safety plan developed and implemented by Salini for working
in compressed air during the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project.
    12. Job hazard analysis--an evaluation of tasks or operations to
identify potential hazards and to determine the necessary controls.
    13. Man-lock--an enclosed space capable of pressurization, and used
for compressing or decompressing any employee or material when either
is passing into, or out of, a working chamber.
    14. Pressure--a force acting on a unit area. Usually expressed as
pounds per square inch (p.s.i.).
    15. p.s.i.a.--pounds per square inch absolute, or absolute
pressure, is the sum of the atmospheric pressure and gauge pressure. At
sea-level, atmospheric pressure is approximately 14.7 p.s.i.a. Adding
14.7 to a pressure expressed in units of p.s.i.g. will yield the
absolute pressure, expressed as p.s.i.a.
    16. p.s.i.g.--pounds per square inch gauge, a common unit of
pressure; pressure expressed as p.s.i.g. corresponds to pressure
relative to atmospheric pressure. At sea-level, atmospheric pressure is
approximately 14.7 p.s.i.a Subtracting 14.7 from a pressure expressed
in units of p.s.i.a. yields the gauge pressure, expressed as p.s.i.g.
At sea level the gauge pressure is 0 psig.
    17. Qualified person--an individual who, by possession of a
recognized degree, certificate, or professional standing, or who, by
extensive knowledge, training, and experience, successfully
demonstrates an ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the
subject matter, the work, or the project.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Adapted from 29 CFR 1926.32(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Working chamber--an enclosed space in the EPBMTBM in which CAWs
perform interventions, and which is accessible only through a man-lock.

E. Safety and Health Practices

    1. Salini would have to adhere to the project-specific HOM
submitted to OSHA as part of the application (see OSHA-2018-2013-0002).
The HOM provides the minimum requirements regarding expected safety and
health hazards (including anticipated geological conditions) and
hyperbaric exposures during the tunnel-construction project.
    2. Salini would have to demonstrate that the EPBMTBM on the project
is designed, fabricated, inspected, tested, marked, and stamped in
accordance with the requirements of ASME PVHO-1.2012 (or most recent
edition of Safety Standards for Pressure Vessels for Human Occupancy)
for the EPBMTBM's hyperbaric chambers.
    3. Salini would have to implement the safety and health
instructions included in the manufacturer's operations manuals for the
EPBMTBM, and the safety and health instructions provided by the
manufacturer for the operation of decompression equipment.
    4. Salini would have to ensure that air or oxygen is the only
breathing gas in the working chamber.
    5. Salini would have to follow the 1992 French Decompression Tables
for air or oxygen decompression as specified in the HOM; specifically,
the extracted portions of the 1992 French Decompression tables titled,
``French Regulation Air Standard Tables.''
    6. Salini would have to equip man-locks used by employees with an
air or oxygen delivery system, as specified by the HOM, for the
project. Salini would be required not to store in the tunnel any oxygen
or other compressed gases used in conjunction with hyperbaric work.
    7. Workers performing hot work under hyperbaric conditions would
have to use flame-retardant personal protective equipment and clothing.
    8. In hyperbaric work areas, Salini would have to maintain an
adequate fire-suppression system approved for hyperbaric work areas.
    9. Salini would have to develop and implement one or more Job
Hazard Analysis (JHA) for work in the hyperbaric work areas, and
review, periodically and as necessary (e.g., after making changes to a
planned intervention that affects its operation), the contents of the
JHAs with affected employees. The JHAs would have to include all the
job functions that the risk assessment \19\ indicates are essential to
prevent injury or illness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See ANSI/AIHA Z10-2012, American National Standard for
Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems, for reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Salini would have to develop a set of checklists to guide
compressed-air work and ensure that employees follow the procedures
required by the proposed Permanent Variance and this Interim Order
(including all procedures

required by the HOM approved by OSHA for the project, which this
proposed variance would incorporate by reference). The checklists would
have to include all steps and equipment functions that the risk
assessment indicates are essential to prevent injury or illness during
compressed-air work.
    Salini would have to ensure that the safety and health provisions
of this project-specific HOM adequately protect the workers of all
contractors and subcontractors involved in hyperbaric operations for
the project to which the HOM applies.

F. Communication

    Salini would have to:
    1. Prior to beginning a shift, implement a system that informs
workers exposed to hyperbaric conditions of any hazardous occurrences
or conditions that might affect their safety, including hyperbaric
incidents, gas releases, equipment failures, earth or rock slides,
cave-ins, flooding, fires, or explosions.
    2. Provide a power-assisted means of communication among affected
workers and support personnel in hyperbaric conditions where unassisted
voice communication is inadequate.
    (a) Use an independent power supply for powered communication
systems, and these systems would have to operate such that use or
disruption of any one phone or signal location will not disrupt the
operation of the system from any other location.
    (b) Test communication systems at the start of each shift and as
necessary thereafter to ensure proper operation.

G. Worker Qualifications and Training

    Salini would have to:
    1. Ensure that each affected worker receives effective training on
how to safely enter, work in, exit from, and undertake emergency
evacuation or rescue from, hyperbaric conditions, and document this
training.
    2. Provide effective instruction on hyperbaric conditions, before
beginning hyperbaric operations, to each worker who performs work, or
controls the exposure of others, and document this instruction. The
instruction would need to include:
    (a) The physics and physiology of hyperbaric work;
    (b) Recognition of pressure-related injuries;
    (c) Information on the causes and recognition of the signs and
symptoms associated with decompression illness, and other hyperbaric
intervention-related health effects (e.g., barotrauma, nitrogen
narcosis, and oxygen toxicity);
    (d) How to avoid discomfort during compression and decompression;
    (e) Information the workers can use to contact the appropriate
healthcare professionals should the workers have concerns that they may
be experiencing adverse health effects from hyperbaric exposure; and
    (f) Procedures and requirements applicable to the employee in the
project-specific HOM.
    3. Repeat the instruction specified in paragraph (G)(2)(b) of this
proposed condition periodically and as necessary (e.g., after making
changes to its hyperbaric operations).
    4. When conducting training for its hyperbaric workers, make this
training available to OSHA personnel and notify the OTPCA at OSHA's
national office and OSHA's nearest affected Area Office before the
training takes place.

H. Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention

    1. Salini would have to initiate and maintain a program of frequent
and regular inspections of the EPBMTBM's hyperbaric equipment and
support systems (such as temperature control, illumination,
ventilation, and fire-prevention and fire-suppression systems), and
hyperbaric work areas, as required under 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2),
including:
    (a) Developing a set of checklists to be used by a competent person
in conducting weekly inspections of hyperbaric equipment and work
areas; and
    (b) Ensuring that a competent person conducts daily visual checks
and weekly inspections of the EPBMTBM.
    2. Remove from service any equipment that constitutes a safety
hazard until it corrects the hazardous condition and has the correction
approved by a qualified person.
    3. Salini would have to maintain records of all tests and
inspections of the EPBMTBM, as well as associated corrective actions
and repairs, at the job site for the duration of the job.

I. Compression and Decompression

    Salini would have to consult with its attending physician
concerning the need for special compression or decompression exposures
appropriate for CAWs not acclimated to hyperbaric exposure.

J. Recordkeeping

    In addition to completing OSHA Form 301 Injury and Illness Incident
Report and OSHA Form 300 Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses,
Salini would have to maintain records of:
    1. The date, times (e.g., time compression started, time spent
compressing, time performing intervention, time spent decompressing),
and pressure for each hyperbaric intervention.
    2. The names of all supervisors and DMTs involved for each
intervention.
    3. The name of each individual worker exposed to hyperbaric
pressure and the decompression protocols and results for each worker.
    4. The total number of interventions and the amount of hyperbaric
work time at each pressure.
    5. The results of the post-intervention physical assessment of each
CAW for signs and symptoms of decompression illness, barotrauma,
nitrogen narcosis, oxygen toxicity or other health effects associated
with work in compressed air for each hyperbaric intervention.

K. Notifications

    1. To assist OSHA in administering the conditions specified herein,
Salini would have to:
    (a) Notify the OTPCA and the BWAO of any recordable injury,
illness, or fatality (by submitting the completed OSHA Form 301
Injuries and Illness Incident Report) \20\ resulting from exposure of
an employee to hyperbaric conditions, including those that do not
require recompression treatment (e.g., nitrogen narcosis, oxygen
toxicity, barotrauma), but still meet the recordable injury or illness
criteria of 29 CFR 1904. The notification would have to be made within
8 hours of the incident or 8 hours after becoming aware of a recordable
injury, illness, or fatality; a copy of the incident investigation
(OSHA Form 301 Injuries and Illness Incident Report) must be submitted
to OSHA within 24 hours of the incident or 24 hours after becoming
aware of a recordable injury, illness, or fatality. In addition to the
information required by OSHA Form 301 Injuries and Illness Incident
Report, the incident-investigation report would have to include a root-
cause determination, and the preventive and corrective actions
identified and implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See footnote 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Provide certification to the BWAO within 15 working days of the
incident that Salini informed affected workers of the incident and the
results of the incident investigation (including the root-cause
determination and preventive and corrective actions identified and
implemented).
    (c) Notify the OTPCA and the BWAO within 15 working days and in
writing, of any change in the compressed-air operations that affects
Salini's ability to comply with the proposed conditions specified
herein.

    (d) Upon completion of the Northeast Boundary Tunnel Project,
evaluate the effectiveness of the decompression tables used throughout
the project, and provide a written report of this evaluation to the
OTPCA and the BWAO.
    Note: The evaluation report would have to contain summaries of: (1)
The number, dates, durations, and pressures of the hyperbaric
interventions completed; (2) decompression protocols implemented
(including composition of gas mixtures (air and/or oxygen), and the
results achieved; (3) the total number of interventions and the number
of hyperbaric incidents (decompression illnesses and/or health effects
associated with hyperbaric interventions as recorded on OSHA Form 301
Injuries and Illness Incident Report and OSHA Form 300 Log of Work-
Related Injuries and Illnesses, and relevant medical diagnoses, and
treating physicians' opinions); and (4) root causes of any hyperbaric
incidents, and preventive and corrective actions identified and
implemented.
    (e) To assist OSHA in administering the proposed conditions
specified herein, inform the OTPCA and the BWAO as soon as possible,
but no later than seven (7) days, after it has knowledge that it will:
    (i) Cease doing business;
    (ii) Change the location and address of the main office for
managing the tunneling operations specified herein; or
    (iii) Transfer the operations specified herein to a successor
company.
    (f) Notify all affected employees of this proposed Permanent
Variance by the same means required to inform them of its application
for a Variance.
    2. OSHA would have to approve the transfer of the proposed
Permanent Variance to a successor company.

VII. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the
agency is issuing this notice pursuant to Section 29 U.S.C. 655(6)(d),
Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012), and
29 CFR 1905.11.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on August 21, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-18377 Filed 8-26-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67163-67164]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27998]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC12-9-000.
    Applicants: Settlers Trail Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Settlers Trail Wind Farm, LLC Application for
Authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, Request for
Expedited Consideration, and Confidential Treatment.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG12-4-000.
    Applicants: Sandy Creek Energy Associates, L.P.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Sandy Creek Energy Associates, L.P.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5048.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER11-4147-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits tariff filing per 35.19a(b):
Filing of a Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5060.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4149-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits tariff filing per 35.19a(b):
Filing of a Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4154-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits tariff filing per 35.19a(b):
Filing of Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5057.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4307-000.
    Applicants: Green Mountain Energy Company.
    Description: Green Mountain Energy Company's market power analysis
of its affiliates in the southeast region.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4308-000.
    Applicants: Reliant Energy Northeast LLC.
    Description: Reliant Energy Northeast LLC's market power analysis
of REN's affiliates in the southeast region.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5140.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-114-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.
    Description: Southwestern Electric Power Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 20111019 Hope Restated and Amended PSA to
be effective 12/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-115-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): eTariff filing of JDA to be effective 12/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5032.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-116-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): eTariff Filing of Joint OATT to be effective 12/18/
2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-117-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Queue No. W3-107; Original Service Agreement No. 3076
to be effective 9/19/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.

    Accession Number: 20111019-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-118-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Power & Light Company.
    Description: Carolina Power & Light Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Rate Schedule No. 190 of Carolina Power and Light
Company to be effective 12/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-119-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Power & Light Company.
    Description: Carolina Power & Light Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Certificate of Concurrence of Carolina Power and
Light Company with Joint OATT to be effective 12/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5062.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-120-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power Corporation.
    Description: Florida Power Corporation submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Certificate of Concurrence of Florida Power
Corporation with Joint OATT to be effective 12/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-122-000.
    Applicants: Union Electric Company, Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Union Electric Company submits tariff filing per 35.1:
RS 94--Interchange Agreement--EAI and AECI to be effective 12/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-123-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Queue Position W1-126; Original Service Agreement No.
3088 to be effective 9/19/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-124-000.
    Applicants: Western Massachusetts Electric Company.
    Description: Western Massachusetts Electric Company submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Pioneer Valley Design & Preliminary Engineering
Agreement for Switchyard Layout to be effective 10/20/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-125-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions to the PJM OATT & OA regarding the DR
Registration Timeline to be effective 12/19/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-126-000.
    Applicants: Trademark Merchant Energy, LLC.
    Description: Trademark Merchant Energy, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Notice of Succession--Trademark Merchant Energy,
LLC to be effective 9/6/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5109.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-127-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Burlingame, KS Wholesale Power Sales Service to be
effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111019-5111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 09, 2011.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 20, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27998 Filed 10-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 250 (Thursday, December 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 96195-96196]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31550]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0332; FMCSA-2014-0102; FMCSA-2014-0103]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for three
individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The renewed exemptions were effective on the dates stated in the
discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the
discussions below. Comments must be received on or before January 30,
2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0332; FMCSA-2014-0102;
FMCSA-2014-0103 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
    online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number(s) for this notice. Note that all comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments online.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for two years if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be
achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to
renew exemptions at the end of the two-year period.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to driver a CMV if that person:

    First perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at
not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if
tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average
hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz,
1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the
audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard
(formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.

    49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) was adopted in 1970, with a revision in 1971
to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a
hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3,
1971).
    The three individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal
of their exemptions from the hearing standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11),
in accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated
these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend
each exemption for a renewable two-year period.

II. Request for Comments

    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of
the three applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining
an exemption from the hearing requirement (78 FR 22772; 80 FR 22768; 80
FR 57032). In addition, for Commercial Driver's License (CDL) holders,
the Commercial Driver's License Information System (CDLIS) and the
Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) are searched for
crash and violation data. For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviews the
driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). These
factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability
to continue to safely operate a CMV in interstate commerce.
    The three drivers in this notice remain in good standing with the
Agency and have not exhibited any medical issues that would compromise
their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous two-year
exemption period. FMCSA has concluded that renewing the exemptions for
each of these applicants is likely to achieve a level of safety equal
to that existing without the exemption. Therefore, FMCSA has decided to
renew each exemption for a two-year period. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each driver has received a renewed
exemption.
    As of August 22, 2016, Byron Smith (TX) has satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(11), from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (78 FR
22772). This driver was included in FMCSA-2012-0332. The exemption was
effective on August 22, 2016, and will expire on August 22, 2018.
    As of August 26, 2016, James Dignan (IL) and Ervin Mitchell (AL),
have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from
the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11), from driving CMVs in
interstate commerce (80 FR 22768; 80 FR 57032)). The drivers were
included in FMCSA-2014-0102; FMCSA-2014-0103). The exemptions were
effective on August 26, 2016, and will expire on August 26, 2018.

IV. Conditions and Requirements

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) Each driver must report any crashes or accidents as defined in 49
CFR 390.5; and (2) report all citations and convictions for
disqualifying offenses under 49 CFR part 383 and 49 CFR 391 to FMCSA.
In addition, the driver must also have a copy of the exemption when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official. The driver is prohibited from operating a
motorcoach or bus with passengers in interstate commerce. The exemption
does not exempt the individual from meeting the applicable CDL testing
requirements. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless
rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The
person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption;
(2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was
maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315.

V. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the three exemption applications,
FMCSA renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the
hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(11). In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years
unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.

    Issued on: December 21, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-31550 Filed 12-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P