[Federal Register: May 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 96)]
[Notices]
[Page 23705-23707]
[DOCID:fr20my09-49]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0277; FRL-8904-6]

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Request for Critical Use
Exemption Applications for 2012

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Solicitation of Applications and Information on
Alternatives.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is soliciting applications for the critical use exemption
from the phaseout of methyl bromide for 2012 and beyond. This exemption
is an annual exemption and all entities interested in obtaining a
critical use exemption must provide EPA with technical and economic
information to support a ``critical use'' claim and must do so by the
deadline specified in this notice even if they have previously applied
for an exemption. Today's notice also invites interested parties to
provide EPA with new data on the technical and economic feasibility of
methyl bromide alternatives.

DATES: Applications for the critical use exemption must be postmarked
on or before July 20, 2009. The response period reflects the
clarifications and reduction of burden in the application.

ADDRESSES: Applications for the methyl bromide critical use exemption
should be submitted in duplicate (two copies) by mail to: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation,
Stratospheric Protection Division, Attention Methyl Bromide Team, Mail
Code 6205J, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by
courier delivery (other than U.S. Post Office overnight) to: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation,
Stratospheric Protection Division, Attention Methyl Bromide Review
Team, 1310 L St. NW., Room 1040, Washington DC 20005. EPA also
encourages users to submit their applications electronically to Robert
Burchard, Stratospheric Protection Division, at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If the application is submitted
electronically, applicants must fax a signed copy of Worksheet 1 to
Robert Burchard at<PHONE_NUMBER> by the application deadline.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General Information: U.S. EPA Stratospheric Ozone Information
Hotline, 1-800-296-1996; also http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr.
    Technical Information: Bill Chism, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs (7503P), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC, 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Economic Information: Elisa Rim, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs (7503P), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC, 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Regulatory Information: Robert Burchard, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division (6205J), 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What do I need to know to respond to this request for
applications?
    A. Who can respond to this request for information?
    B. Whom can I contact to find out whether a consortium is
submitting an application for my methyl bromide use?
    C. How do I obtain an application form for the methyl bromide
critical use exemption?
    D. What alternatives must applicants address when applying for a
critical use exemption?
    E. What portions of the applications will be considered
confidential business information?
    F. Must I submit a ``Notice of Intent to Apply''?
    G. What if I submit an incomplete application?
    H. What if I applied for a critical use exemption in a previous
year?
II. What is the legal authority for the critical use exemption?
    A. What is the Clean Air Act (CAA) authority for the critical
use exemption?
    B. What is the Montreal Protocol authority for the critical use
exemption?
III. How is the U.S. implementing the critical use exemption?

I. What do I need to know to respond to this request for applications?

A. Who can respond to this request for information?

    Entities interested in obtaining a critical use exemption must
complete the application form available at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/
mbr. The application form may be submitted either by a consortium
representing multiple users who have similar circumstances or by
individual users who anticipate needing methyl bromide in 2012 and
believe there are no technically and economically feasible
alternatives. EPA encourages groups of users with similar circumstances
of use to submit a single application (for example, any number of pre-
plant users with similar soil, pest, and climactic conditions can join
together to submit a single application). In some instances, state
agencies will assist users with the application process (see discussion
of voluntary state involvement in Part I.B. below). Given that this is
the eighth round of the critical use exemption process, EPA will take a
skeptical view regarding supporting new nominations (meaning, specific
applicants who have not previously been nominated by the U.S.
Government for an exemption) unless the applicant demonstrates that an
unforeseeable change in circumstances (e.g., withdrawal or significant
change in registration status of an alternative) justifies the need.
    In addition to requesting information from applicants for the
critical use exemption, this solicitation for information provides an
opportunity for any interested party to provide EPA with information on
methyl bromide alternatives (e.g., technical and/or economic
feasibility research). The application form for the methyl bromide
critical use exemption and other

information on research relevant to alternatives must be sent to the
addresses specified above or e-mailed to the address specified above.
The applicant's signature, which is required in order for EPA to
process the application, is on Worksheet 1 of the application.
Applicants submitting electronically must also fax a signed copy of
Worksheet 1 to Robert Burchard at<PHONE_NUMBER> by the application
deadline.

B. Whom can I contact to find out whether a consortium is submitting an
application for my methyl bromide use?

    You should contact your local, state, regional, or national
commodity association to find out whether it plans to submit an
application on behalf of your commodity group.
    Additionally, you should contact your state regulatory agency
(generally this will be the state's agriculture or environmental
protection agency) to receive information about its involvement in the
process. If your state agency has chosen to participate, EPA recommends
that you first submit your application to the state agency, which will
then forward applications to EPA. The National Pesticide Information
Center Web site identifies the lead pesticide agency in each state
(http://npic.orst.edu/state1.htm).

C. How do I obtain an application form for the methyl bromide critical
use exemption?

    An application form for the methyl bromide critical use exemption
can be obtained either in electronic or hard-copy form. EPA encourages
use of the electronic form. Applications can be obtained in the
following ways:
    1. PDF format and Microsoft Excel at EPA's Web site: http://
www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/cueinfo.html;
    2. Hard copy ordered through the Stratospheric Ozone Protection
Hotline at 1-800-296-1996;
    3. Hard-copy format at DOCKET ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0277. The
docket can be accessed at the http://www.regulations.gov site. To
obtain copies of materials in hard copy, please e-mail the EPA Docket
Center<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
D. Which alternatives must applicants address when applying for a
critical use exemption?

    To support the assertion that a specific use of methyl bromide is
``critical,'' applicants are expected to demonstrate that there are no
technically and economically feasible alternatives available for that
use. The Parties to the Montreal Protocol have developed an
``International Index'' of methyl bromide alternatives, which lists
chemical and non-chemical alternatives by crop. In 2008, the United
States submitted an index of alternatives, which includes the current
registration status of available and potential alternatives, that is
available on the Ozone Secretariat Web site: http://ozone.unep.org/
Exemption_Information/Critical_use_nominations_for_methyl_
bromide/MeBr_Submissions/USA-Alternatives-Ex4-1-2008.pdf.
    Applicants must address technical, regulatory, and economic issues
that limit the adoption of ``chemical alternatives'' and combinations
of ``chemical'' and ``non-chemical alternatives'' listed for their crop
within the ``U.S. Index'' of Methyl Bromide Alternatives. Applicants
must also address technical, regulatory, and economic issues that limit
the adoption of ``non-chemical alternatives'' and combinations of
``chemical'' and ``non-chemical alternatives'' listed for their crop in
the ``International Index.''

E. What portions of the applications will be considered confidential
business information?

    You may assert a business confidentiality claim covering part or
all of the information by placing on (or attaching to) the information,
at the time it is submitted to EPA, a cover sheet, stamped or typed
legend, or other suitable form of notice employing language such as
``trade secret,'' ``proprietary,'' or ``company confidential.'' You
should clearly identify the allegedly confidential portions of
otherwise non-confidential documents, and you may submit them
separately to facilitate identification and handling by EPA. If you
desire confidential treatment only until a certain date or until the
occurrence of a certain event, your notice should state that.
Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by
EPA only to the extent, and by means of the procedures, set forth under
40 CFR part 2, subpart B; 41 FR 36752, 43 FR 40000, 50 FR 51661. If no
claim of confidentiality accompanies the information when EPA receives
it, EPA may make it available to the public without further notice.
    If you are asserting a business confidentiality claim covering part
or all of the information in the application, please submit a non-
confidential version that EPA can place in the public docket for
reference by other interested parties. Do not include on the
``Worksheet Six: Application Summary'' page of the application any
information that you wish to claim as confidential business
information. Any information on Worksheet 6 shall not be considered
confidential and will not be treated as such by the Agency. EPA will
place a copy of Worksheet 6 in the public domain. Applications that are
not confidential business information will be placed in the Docket in
their entirety. Please note, claiming business confidentiality may
delay EPA's ability to review your application.

F. Must I submit a ``Notice of Intent to Apply''?

    A ``Notice of Intent to Apply'' is not required, but would
facilitate the organization of the application review during the
critical use exemption process. If EPA is aware of the consortia and
the individuals who intend to submit applications 30 days before the
application deadline, the technical experts will be better positioned
to review the application. This Notice may be submitted to Robert
Burchard via e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via U.S. mail to U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation,
Stratospheric Protection Division, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 6205J,
Washington, DC 20460 or by courier to U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Stratospheric Protection Division,
1310 L St., NW., Room 1040, Washington, DC 20005.

G. What if I submit an incomplete application?

    EPA will not accept any applications postmarked after July 20,
2009. If the application is postmarked by the deadline but is
incomplete or missing any data elements, EPA will not accept the
application and will not include the application in the U.S. nomination
submitted for international consideration. If the application is
substantially complete with only minor errors, corrections will be
accepted. EPA reviewers may also call an applicant for further
clarification of an application, even if it is complete.
    All consortia or users who did not apply to EPA for the 2008
control period (calendar year) must submit an entire completed
application with all Worksheets.

H. What if I applied for a critical use exemption in a previous year?

    Users must apply to EPA for critical use exemptions on an annual
basis. However, if a user group submitted a complete application to EPA
in 2008, the user is only required to submit revised copies of the
certain Worksheets listed below, though the entire

application with all Worksheets must be on file with EPA. You must
submit Worksheets 1, 2B, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 6 in full regardless of
whether you submitted an application in 2008. You need only complete
the remaining worksheets if any information has changed since 2008. If
you submitted a critical use exemption application to EPA in 2002,
2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007 but did not submit an application in
2008, then you must submit all of the worksheets in the application
again in their entirety.

II. What is the legal authority for the critical use exemption?

A. What is the Clean Air Act (CAA) authority for the critical use
exemption?

    The October 1998 amendments to the Clean Air Act added sections
604(d)(6), 604(e)(3), and 604(h), requiring EPA to conform the U.S.
phaseout schedule for methyl bromide to the provisions of the Montreal
Protocol for industrialized countries. Under this schedule methyl
bromide was phased out starting in 2005. Additionally, the 1998
amendment allowed EPA to exempt the production and import of methyl
bromide from the phaseout for critical uses starting January 1, 2005,
to the extent consistent with the Montreal Protocol.

B. What is the Montreal Protocol authority for the critical use
exemption?

    The Montreal Protocol provides an exemption to the phaseout of
methyl bromide for critical uses in Article 2H, paragraph 5. The
Parties to the Protocol included such an exemption in recognition that
alternatives might not be available by 2005 for certain uses of methyl
bromide agreed by the Parties to be ``critical uses.''
    In their Ninth Meeting (1997), the Parties to the Protocol agreed
to Decision IX/6, setting forth the following criteria for a ``critical
use'' determination:
    (a) That a use of methyl bromide should qualify as ``critical''
only if the nominating Party determines that:
    (i) The specific use is critical because the lack of availability
of methyl bromide for that use would result in a significant market
disruption; and
    (ii) There are no technically and economically feasible
alternatives or substitutes available to the user that are acceptable
from the standpoint of environment and health and are suitable to the
crops and circumstances of the nomination.
    (b) That production and consumption, if any, of methyl bromide for
a critical use should be permitted only if:
    (i) All technically and economically feasible steps have been taken
to minimize the critical use and any associated emission of methyl
bromide;
    (ii) Methyl bromide is not available in sufficient quantity and
quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled methyl bromide, also
bearing in mind the developing countries' need for methyl bromide;
    (iii) It is demonstrated that an appropriate effort is being made
to evaluate, commercialize and secure national regulatory approval of
alternatives and substitutes, taking into consideration the
circumstances of the particular nomination . * * * Non-Article 5
Parties [e.g., the U.S.] must demonstrate that research programs are in
place to develop and deploy alternatives and substitutes. * * *
    A Class I controlled substance that was produced or imported
through the expenditure of allowances prior to its phaseout date can
continue to be used by industry and the public after that specific
chemical's phaseout under EPA's phaseout regulations, unless otherwise
precluded under separate regulations.

III. How is the U.S. implementing the critical use exemption?

    Under the provisions of both the CAA and the Montreal Protocol, the
critical use exemption became available to approved users on January 1,
2005. There is both a domestic and international component to the
critical use exemption process. The following outline projects a
timeline for the process for the next three years.
    May 20, 2009: Solicit applications for the methyl bromide critical
use exemption for 2012.
    July 20, 2009: Deadline for submitting critical use exemption
applications to EPA.
    Fall 2009: U.S. Government (through EPA, Department of State, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, and other interested federal agencies)
prepares U.S. Critical Use Nomination package.
    January 24, 2010: Deadline for U.S. Government to submit U.S.
nomination package to the Protocol Parties.
    Early 2010: Technical and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) and
Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) reviews Parties'
nominations for critical use exemptions.
    Mid 2010: Parties consider TEAP/MBTOC recommendations.
    November 2010: Parties authorize critical use exemptions for methyl
bromide for production and consumption in 2012.
    Mid 2011: EPA publishes proposed rule for allocating critical use
exemptions in the U.S. for 2012.
    Late 2011: EPA publishes final rule allocating critical use
exemptions in the U.S. for 2012.
    January 1, 2012: Critical use exemption permits the limited
production and import of methyl bromide for specified uses for the 2012
control period.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

    Dated: May 4, 2009.
Brian J. McLean,
Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-11742 Filed 5-19-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45238-45248]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18468]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0008]

Newport News Shipbuilding; Notice of Application for a Permanent
Variance and Request for Comments

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of Newport News
Shipbuilding for a permanent variance from the OSHA shipyard-employment
standards that prohibit shipyard employers from permitting workers to
ride the hook or the load, from swinging or suspending loads over the
heads of workers, and placing employees in a hazardous position between
a swinging load and a fixed object while engaged in the construction
and assembly of modular ship sections.

DATES: Submit comments, information, documents in response to this
notice, and request for a hearing on or before August 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-1648.
    3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier)
service: Submit comments, requests, and any attachments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2012-0008, Technical Data Center, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY number: (877) 889-
5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays
in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures concerning delivery of materials by express mail, hand
delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA
Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
the OSHA docket number (OSHA-2012-0008). OSHA places comments and other
materials, including any personal information, in the public docket
without revision, and these materials will be available online at
http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters
about submitting statements they do not want made available to the
public, or submitting comments that contain personal information
(either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers,
birth dates, and medical data.
    5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket 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 Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket
submissions.
    6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before August 28, 2015 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

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, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; 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, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone:
(202) 693-2110 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    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 adduced in support of each denial; and (3) any views or
arguments on any issue of fact or law presented in the variance
application.

I. Notice of Application

    Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding Inc., 4101 Washington Ave., Newport
News, Virginia 23607, submitted on October 6, 2009, an application for
a permanent multi-state variance 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)'') (Exhibit 1:
Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding's original

variance application dated 10/26/2009). On September 6, 2011, Newport
News Shipbuilding (NNS), a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries,
the successor to Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, submitted an amended
application for a permanent variance for the Newport News, Virginia,
facility only (Exhibit 2: NNS's amended variance
application).1 2 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Unless stated otherwise, the terms ``variance application''
or ``application'' used subsequently in this notice refers to both
the original (2009) and amended (2011) applications submitted by
NNS.
    \2\ This address also is the place of employment described in
the application.
    \3\ Virginia operates its own OSHA-approved occupational safety
and health plan under Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act (29 U.S.C. 667). Thus, Virginia generally adopts and
enforces its own occupational safety and health standards. However,
the Virginia plan does not cover private-sector maritime facilities.
Accordingly, Federal OSHA retains its authority over occupational
safety and health matters not covered by the Virginia plan (see 29
CFR 1952.375(b)(1)), including granting variances from OSHA
standards applicable to such facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NNS seeks a permanent variance from the provisions in OSHA
shipyard-employment standards that regulate gear and equipment used for
rigging and materials handling, specifically paragraphs (i), (j), and
(q) of 29 CFR 1915.116. These provisions prohibit shipyard employers
from permitting workers to ride the hook or the load, swinging or
suspending loads over the heads of workers, or placing workers in a
hazardous position between a swinging load and a fixed object. These
paragraphs specify the following requirements:
     29 CFR 1915.116(i): Employees shall not be permitted to
ride the hook or the load.
     29 CFR 1915.116(j): Loads (tools, equipment or other
materials) shall not be swung or suspended over the heads of employees.
     29 CFR 1915.116(q): At no time shall an employee be
permitted to place himself in a hazardous position between a swinging
load and a fixed object.
    In its application, NNS contends that the permanent variance would
provide its workers with a place of employment that is at least as safe
and healthful as they would obtain under these standards. NNS certifies
that it (1) provided the union representative \4\ with a copy of its
variance application, and (2) notified its workers of the variance
request by posting a summary of the application at a prominent location
where it normally posts notices to its workers, and specifying where
the workers can examine a complete copy of the application. In
addition, NNS states that it informed workers and the union
representative of their right to petition the Assistant Secretary of
Labor for Occupational Safety and Health for a hearing on this variance
application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Mr. Arnold D. Outlaw, President, Local 8888, United
Steelworkers (USW), Newport News, VA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Supplementary Information

A. Overview

    NNS operates a shipyard in Newport News, Virginia, where it
designs, builds, overhauls, and repairs a wide variety of ships for the
U.S. government and navies of other countries. In the course of
shipbuilding operations, NNS performs many operations that require the
use of cranes or hoists during the course of vessel construction. Work
processes include the erection of large modular units that, when
assembled, comprise a vessel. In exceptional cases, workers may be
beneath a portion of the unit for brief periods of time. Workers who
work beneath units primarily remove interferences and ensure proper
alignment of the units, as discussed below.
    As noted above, Sec.  1915.116(i), (j), and (q) prohibit workers
from riding the hook or load, working on or under a suspended load, or
working between a swinging load and a fixed object. However, the
procedures and equipment used in shipbuilding today differ
substantially from the procedures and equipment used when OSHA adopted
these standards in 1982. Shipbuilding is no longer the ``stick
construction'' industry it was when the standards were promulgated.
With technological advancements, shipyards today build vessels using
modular-production methods. Using these methods, shipyards completely
construct major units of a vessel in modules. These modules include all
components such as piping, electrical equipment, wiring, machinery, and
ventilation. Modular-ship sections typically weigh 25 to 400 tons, but
can weigh more. Generally, NNS uses cranes/hoists to lift and move ship
sections during the following phases of modular production:
    Phase 1: Fabrication shop/area. In the fabrication shop/area, NNS
uses cranes/hoists to lift and rotate ship sections to various
orientations to optimize work quality and productivity.
    Phase 2: Travel from the fabrication shop/area to the ship-assembly
staging area. In this phase, NNS typically uses one or more cranes/
hoists to move a ship section from the fabrication shop/area, through
the shipyard, and to the ship-assembly staging area.
    Phase 3: Lifting from the staging area to the ship-assembly
location (such as a dry dock or marine railway). This phase consists of
using cranes/hoists for end-to-end installation (involving horizontal
assembly), stacking installation (involving vertical assembly), or
inserting installation (involving both horizontal and vertical
assembly).
     End-to-end installation. This installation involves using
cranes/hoists to move ship sections for end-to-end mating (horizontal
assembly) of the sections, with brief worker exposure on or under a
suspended load, or between a swinging load and a fixed object.
     Stacking installation. In this phase, which involves using
a crane/hoist to place a ship module on top of another module (vertical
assembly), it is necessary to have workers work briefly on or under a
suspended load, or between a swinging load and a fixed object, to
identify and remove interferences (or obstructions) that preclude
proper alignment and mating of the sections.
     Inserting installation. These installations involve a
combination of end-to-end and stacking installations in which NNS uses
cranes/hoists to both lower and move horizontally ship sections into
their mating position. For inserting installations, it is necessary to
have workers work briefly on or under a suspended load, or between a
swinging load and a fixed object, to identify and remove interferences
for properly aligning and mating the sections.
    NNS argues that OSHA should grant it a variance from 29 CFR
1915.116(i), (j), and (q) because modular shipbuilding occasionally
requires workers to work briefly on or under a suspended load, or
between a swinging load and a fixed object.
    NNS points to OSHA's past approval of an alternative standard for
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for work
performed under a suspended load (see Ex. 1, Appendix A). This
alternative standard, NASA-STD-8719.9, establishes a specific set of
controls when no alternative to working under a section or module is
available. The NASA document provides 15 safety and engineering
requirements that NASA uses in lieu of compliance with 29 CFR
1910.179(n)(3)(vi), 29 CFR 1910.180(h)(3)(vi), and 29 CFR
1910.180(h)(4)(ii).

B. NNS's Proposed Alternative to 29 CFR 1915.116(i), (j), and (q)

    As part of its variance application, NNS is proposing an
alternative means of compliance with the provisions prohibiting work on
or under a suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging
modular-ship

section and a fixed object. In its variance request, NNS states that
``[m]odular ship construction and repair techniques require, in rare
cases, personnel to be under, in, or on such a load as the final fit-up
of a modular section is made'' (Exhibit 2: NNS's amended variance
application). NNS asserts that its alternative means of compliance
would provide equivalent protection with the provisions of the standard
from which it seeks a variance.
    NNS's application includes a description of the alternate means of
compliance that it would implement during modular-ship construction and
structural-repair operations. The protection of workers from exposure
to the crushing hazards associated with work on or under a suspended
load, or between a swinging load and a fixed object during the lifting
phase of modular-ship sections includes the application of significant
engineering, administrative, coordination, and supervisory controls.
The variance application further describes ship construction and ship-
repair operations as: Highly engineered; involving tested and certified
equipment; and including continuous communication and monitoring
between the workers involved. Hazard analysis, rigging procedures,
rigging-lifting-plan with associated drawings, and crew briefings are
among existing modular-ship-section lifting requirements adopted by the
industry. All workers performing various jobs (e.g., supervisors,
operators, riggers) receive special training and obtain necessary
qualifications or certifications. Accordingly, NNS proposes the
following conditions for its alternative means of compliance:
1. General Conditions and Definition of Suspended Load Operation
    NNS defines a ``suspended-load operation'' as an operation that
meets the following three criteria:
    (a) Involves the use of a crane or hoist that supports the weight
of a suspended load, whether the load is static or dynamic, including
the rigging (i.e., slings, Hydra Sets, lifting fixtures, shackles,
straps) when attached to the hook (Note: This condition does not apply
to loads supported entirely by a holding fixture, or blocks, even
though still attached to the crane and hoist hook);
    (b) When workers involved in the operation have any part of their
body directly under the suspended load (Note: This condition does not
apply when workers have their hands on the sides of a load, e.g., to
guide the load); and
    (c) In the event of a crane or hoist failure, the falling load
could contact workers working directly under it, with injury or death a
possible result (Note: This condition does not apply when the falling
load would push a worker's hand away such that no injury could result,
or the load would come to rest on a holding fixture or block before
injuring a worker).
2. Suspended-Load Operations
    NNS proposed to meet the following conditions prior to performing
suspended-load operations:
    (a) A Registered Professional Engineer familiar with the type of
equipment used for the suspended-load operations will prepare and sign
a written hazard analysis for each operation. The hazard analysis will
provide the following information:
    (i) Justification of why NNS cannot perform the operation without
workers on or under a suspended load, or between a swinging load and a
fixed object, including procedural and design options investigated to
determine if NNS could perform the operation without workers working on
or under a suspended load, or between a swinging load and a fixed
object.
    (ii) Detailed description of the precautions taken to protect
workers should the load shift, move inadvertently or drop. This
description will include an evaluation of the secondary support system,
i.e., equipment designed to assume support of (i.e., catch) the load to
prevent injury to workers should the crane/hoist fail; this description
will include a determination of the feasibility of using this system
under the planned lifting conditions. NNS will construct the secondary
support system in accordance with recognized engineering practices and
designed with a minimum safety factor of 2 to yield.
    (iii) The maximum number of exposed workers allowed under a load
suspended from a crane/hoist. In this regard, NNS will limit the number
of workers working under a load suspended from a crane/hoist. NNS will
allow only those workers absolutely necessary to perform the operation
to work in the safety-controlled access area. The rigging-lifting-plan
drawing(s) will identify the name and exact location of each individual
worker involved in the suspended-load operation and the drawing will
ensure that each worker is in the safest location.
    (iv) The time of exposure. NNS will ensure that workers' exposures
under suspended loads are brief and that they do not remain under the
load any longer than necessary to complete the work.
    (b) The most senior manager at the site for crane operations and a
qualified representative of NNS's health and safety department must
review and approve in writing the suspended-load operation based on a
detailed hazard analysis and rigging-lifting-plan drawing(s).
    (c) NNS will maintain written, up-to-date procedures that specify
the minimum requirements for suspended loads. Accordingly, NNS will
revise the written hazard analysis and the Operational Procedures
Document (or Lift Plan) (e.g., Operations and Maintenance Instruction,
Technical Operating Procedure, Work-Authorization Document) to specify
the necessary additional requirements identified by the hazard analysis
discussed in Condition 2(b). The procedures will be readily available
on-site for inspection by workers during the operation at locations
normally used to post worker information.
    (d) Each suspended-load operation will have a separate hazard
analysis and rigging-lifting-plan drawing performed and approved. A
separate hazard analysis is not needed for a limited number of routine
and repetitive operations for which a rigging-lifting-plan drawing(s)
and procedures already exist and for which no new hazards are present.
    (e) NNS will design, test, inspect, maintain, and operate each
crane/hoist used in a suspended-load operation in accordance with OSHA
standards and internal written procedures.\5\ Registered professional
engineers will review and certify all aspects of crane/hoist
operations. NNS will maintain the results of the annual inspections and
all related documents and make them available to OSHA on request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NNS designated its internal written suspended-load
operational procedures as proprietary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (f) Each crane/hoist involved in suspended-load operations will
undergo a system safety review that uses all documentation available on
the suspended-load operation, including the hazards analysis and the
rigging-lifting-plan drawing, and with approval based on a detailed
analysis of the potential hazards and rationale for acceptance. The
review will determine single failure points (SFPs) in all critical
mechanical functional components and support systems in the drive
trains and critical electrical components.
    (i) For cranes/hoists identified as having no SFPs, but for which
failure would result in inadvertent movement of the load, the total
weight of the

suspended load will not exceed the device's rated load.
    (ii) For cranes/hoists identified as having SFPs the failure of
which would result in inadvertent movement of the load, the most senior
manager at the site for crane operations and a qualified representative
of NNS's health and safety department will approve the use of that
device for suspended-load operations.
    (g) Before lifting a load during a suspended-load operation, the
crane/hoist will undergo a visual inspection (without major
disassembly) of components instrumental in controlling the lift (e.g.,
primary and secondary brake systems, hydraulics, mechanical linkages,
and wire ropes). The most senior manager at the site for crane
operations must resolve any potential problems before the operation
begins. This pre-lift inspection will be in addition to the inspections
required in Sec.  1910.179(j) and 180(d).
    (h) A trained and qualified operator (e.g., 29 CFR 1926.1427) will
remain at the crane/hoist controls while workers are under the load.
    (i) Safety-controlled access areas will be established with
appropriate barriers (rope, cones, safety watches etc.). All non-
essential employees will be required to remain outside the barriers.
    (j) Prior to initiating any suspended-load operation, the most
senior manager at the site for crane operations or designee (e.g.,
supervisor controlling the lift) will hold a face-to-face meeting of
all workers involved in the operation to plan and review the approved
lift plan (operational procedural document), including procedures for
entering and leaving the safety-controlled access area and the written
hazard analysis.
    (k) The most senior manager at the site for crane operations or
designee (e.g., supervisor controlling the lift) will ensure
communications (i.e., voice, radio, hard-wired, or visual) are
maintained between the crane/hoist operator(s), signal person(s), and
any worker on or under the suspended modular-ship section, or between
the swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object.
    (l) Workers on or under a suspended modular-ship section, or
between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object, will remain
in continuous sight of the operator(s) and/or the signal person(s) when
feasible. When NNS demonstrates that maintaining continuous sight is
not feasible, these workers must remain in continuous communications
with the operator and/or signal person.
    (m) Workers will not alter their planned access/egress travel path
without approval from the most senior manager at the site for crane
operations or designee (e.g., supervisor controlling the lift), and
then only after the most senior manager at the site for crane
operations communicates this change to all workers involved in the
operation.
    (n) NNS will provide a list of approved suspended-load operations,
a list of cranes/hoists used for suspended-load operations, and copies
of the associated hazards analysis to OSHA's Office of Technical
Programs and Coordination Activities (OTPCA) and the Norfolk Area
Office within 15 working days after developing these documents.

III. Decision

    After reviewing NNS's amended application, OSHA preliminarily finds
that NNS developed and proposes to implement engineering and
administrative controls that appear to effectively control the hazards
associated with work performed on or under a suspended modular-ship
section, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object
for brief periods.
    NNS also developed and proposes to implement an alternative means
of compliance that appears to provide workers with protection that is
equivalent to the protection afforded to them by the OSHA standards
that regulate work on or under a suspended load, or between a swinging
load and a fixed object (see, respectively, 29 CFR 1915.116(i), (j),
and (q)). This alternative incorporates key elements of a job hazard
analysis and lift planning, review, and approval to proceed (i.e.,
permitting). The alternative will inform essential and affected
employees of the steps required to complete suspended-load operations
safely, including the hazards associated with these operations and the
methods NNS will apply during each step to control the hazards (e.g.,
secondary support systems, inspection of hoisting and rigging
equipment, use of safety-controlled access areas, and specially trained
and qualified workers).
    In addition, NNS developed and proposes to implement a worker-
training program to instruct affected and essential employees in the
hazards associated with performing lifting and rigging operations.
    OSHA recognized and addressed the need to work on or under a
suspended load, or between a swinging load and a fixed object, when it
granted NASA an alternative standard (Ex. 1). The alternative standard
permitted NASA to expose its workers to these conditions when it
complied with specific OSHA standards such as the construction hoisting
and rigging standard (29 CFR 1926.753) and the conditions of the
alternate standard (see Appendix A of NASA-STD-8719.9, NASA Standard
for Lifting Devices and Equipment (in Ex. 1). NNS is proposing to adopt
and implement the conditions of NASA's alternate standard for its
suspended-load operations.
    Based on a review of available information and NNS's variance
application, OSHA made a number of additions and revisions to the
application that it believes are necessary to protect NNS's workers
involved in suspended-load operations. The following items describe
these additions and revisions:
    1. OSHA bases the scope of the revised variance application
primarily on the scope specified in NNS's application. OSHA expanded
the scope to include the types of modular-section lifts made from the
Lift Staging Area (described earlier in this notice as Phase 3 of
modular ship section lifts) to a ship and to describe the types of
lifting operations excluded from the scope of the application. The
expanded scope serves to increase worker protection from exposure to
crushing hazards associated with work on or under a suspended modular-
ship section, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed
object, by providing precise identification and description of the
limited circumstances under which the variance conditions would apply.
    2. OSHA added a section to the application that defined the terms
``essential employee,'' ``modular-ship section,'' ``safety-controlled
access area,'' and ``suspended-load operation'' based on NNS's use of
these terms in its variance application (Exhibit 2: NNS's amended
variance application). OSHA defined the terms ``competent person'' and
``qualified person, employee, or worker'' based on existing OSHA
standards. OSHA added a definition for ``lift incident'' based on
conditions the Agency added to the variance. OSHA added a definitions
section because it believes the definition will enhance the NNS's and
its workers' understanding of the conditions specified by the variance,
thereby enhancing worker safety and health.
    3. OSHA defines a number of abbreviations to the variance
application. OSHA added these definitions to clarify the abbreviations
and standardize their usage, thereby enhancing NNS's and its workers'
understanding of the conditions specified by the variance application,
thereby enhancing their safety and health.

    4. OSHA added a condition requiring the use of properly engineered
lashing material to ensure that suspended loads do not inadvertently
move or fall from cranes/hoists. This addition will enhance worker
safety and health by ensuring that lashing material is strong enough to
prevent the load from dropping and injuring workers.
    5. As part of the safety and engineering criteria, NNS proposed the
development of a written hazard analysis in its application, and OSHA
added a condition to this proposal that NNS perform a Failure Modes and
Effects Analysis (FMEA) and approval to identify potential single point
failures. Such analysis serves to further minimize the potential for
inadvertent movement of the suspended load during modular-ship section
lifts. This addition will minimize worker exposure to crushing hazards
during modular-ship section lifts.
    6. OSHA added a condition that the most senior manager at the site
for crane operations approve in writing the written hazard analysis and
rigging-lifting-plan drawings to ensure that these documents are
technically accurate and reflect the knowledge and best practices of
those responsible for supervising suspended-load operations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The hazard analysis and rigging-lifting-plan drawings will
protect worker safety and health by making NNS plan suspended-load
operations, anticipate hazards beforehand, and place workers at
locations to minimize their exposure to hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. NNS proposed to implement a system-safety review to determine
SFPs. OSHA added the clarification to the variance application that a
registered professional engineer (PE) must perform this review using a
FMEA. This addition will ensure that NNS conducts the system-safety
review according to professional standards. OSHA also clarified that
the FMEA should include any weight calculations or structural analysis
performed during the review. The FMEA will protect worker safety and
health by accurately and reliably identifying potential crane/hoist
failures that might result in inadvertent movement of the suspended
load, thereby endangering workers near this equipment.
    8. NNS proposed in its application to develop an Operational
Procedural Document. OSHA added a condition to the application
requiring that the most senior manager at the site for crane operations
(for example, the supervisor controlling the lift) review the Lift Plan
with essential employees to ensure that these workers are familiar with
and thoroughly understand the procedures governing the suspended-load
operations. The Lift Plan will enhance worker safety and health by
ensuring that suspended-load operations occur according to procedures
planned in advance to minimize hazards.
    9. OSHA added a condition requiring that NNS implement procedures
to control hazards from unplanned or unforeseen activities that were
not included in the initial planning of the modular-ship section lift
operations and not covered by the initial procedural documents (such as
lift plan, hazard analysis, and rigging/lifting drawing(s)). This
condition will require NNS to develop the Operational Procedural
Document to cover the unplanned activities in order to protect worker
safety and health by reducing the probability of worker exposure to
unanticipated hazards.
    10. NNS proposed a case-by-case review of planned suspended-load
operations that follow the set of safety and engineering criteria
(described by this condition). OSHA added to this condition that a
senior crane operations manager and a health and safety representative
must perform this review following development of the Operational
Procedural Document. This addition will enhance worker safety and
health by ensuring that knowledgeable company officials responsible for
suspended-load operations conduct the review.
    11. NNS proposed a condition addressing use of the Operational
Procedural Document, and OSHA added to this condition requirements that
NNS: comply with a program operated by an accredited agency under
OSHA's Gear Certification program (29 CFR part 1919); use registered
PE-designed pad-eye connection points; comply with nationally
recognized non-destructive testing methods; \7\ and provide drawings to
document hoisting and rigging equipment design specifications. These
additions will protect worker safety and health by ensuring all
equipment used for suspended-load operations will be of suitable
quality and design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For example, ASTM E164-13 Standard Practice for Contact
Ultrasonic Testing of Weldments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. NNS proposed a pre-lift inspection in its application. OSHA
added a condition to this proposal requiring that safety devices be
operational during any lifts conducted during the pre-lift inspections.
This addition will increase worker protection during pre-lift
inspections.
    13. OSHA added a condition specifying that NNS develop a written
checklist to document the identification and removal of interferences
to proper mating and unnecessary or unsecured items. The inspection
using this checklist must be conducted by a qualified employee(s)
before the suspended-load operation begins. This condition will protect
worker safety and health by reducing the time workers spend under the
suspended load removing interferences to proper mating, and eliminating
the need for workers to remove unsecured items while exposed to a
suspended load.
    14. Another condition added by OSHA requires that that NNS conduct
a test lift before beginning each suspended-load operation. The test
lift will protect worker safety and health by ensuring that equipment,
including the rigging and crane/hoist systems, is in working order for
the lift, thus minimizing the possibility of worker harm resulting from
equipment failure.
    15. NNS proposed a condition specifying that a trained and
qualified operator remain at the crane/hoist controls while workers are
on or under a suspended load, or between a swinging load and a fixed
object. OSHA added a condition requiring that the operator not initiate
movement while workers are on or under a suspended load, or between a
swinging load and a fixed object, and that NNS use safety devices such
as brakes, dogs or stops to further ensure that no such movement takes
place. This added condition will protect workers from the hazards
associated with inadvertent movement of suspended loads.
    16. In its application, NNS proposed the use of safety-controlled
access areas where all non-essential employees must remain outside the
controlled access areas during modular-ship section load operations.
This requirement will protect workers by minimizing the number of
workers exposed to this hazard.
    17. OSHA added the prohibition of working under, in or on suspended
loads requirement to limit the presence of essential employees to
adjusting chain falls, making initial connections or confirming
clearances between hull structures and outfitting systems. This
requirement protects workers by minimizing worker exposure to the
hazards of working under, in, or on suspended loads.
    18. OSHA added a condition that NNS train workers (including, but
not limited to, current and newly assigned to be involved in modular-
ship section load operations, qualified, and essential employees) to
recognize hazards associated with work under, in or on suspended
modular-ship section loads and associated hazard-control methods which
minimize their risk of harm during these operations. This added

condition includes refresher training to ensure that workers retain
knowledge of the hazards and associated control methods or update this
knowledge as changes occur in hazard-control technology, methods, and
procedures. Finally, the added condition requires NNS to document the
training to provide a means of tracking the training received by
workers and, consequently, to prompt NNS to update that training if
necessary.
    19. NNS proposed a pre-job briefing requirement in its variance
application, and OSHA clarified this condition by specifying that: The
pre-job briefing include all workers involved in the suspended-load
operation, both essential and non-essential employees; NNS document
worker attendance at the briefing using a signed roster; and the
briefing address the rigging-lifting drawing(s). This clarification
will protect workers by refreshing their knowledge of procedures just
before the suspended-load operation begins.
    20. NNS proposed having continuous communication during suspended-
load operations, and OSHA revised the condition by specifying that
suspended-load operations must cease upon loss of communications. This
requirement will protect workers by minimizing their exposure to
hazards during communications failure.
    21. In its application, NNS proposed that workers remain in
continuous sight of the operator(s) and/or signal person(s) when
feasible during suspended-load operations. OSHA clarified this
condition by specifying that all essential employees must remain in
continuous sight and/or be in communication with the most senior
manager at the site for crane operations or designee (e.g., supervisor
controlling the lift) because this manager must account for all workers
involved in the operation to ensure that no worker is in harm's way.
    22. OSHA added a condition that the crane/hoist operator would have
to lower the suspended load to the ground or other supporting
structure, or the most senior manager at the site for crane operations
or designee (e.g., supervisor controlling the lift) would have to
cordon off the site of the crane/hoist operation, if NNS postpones or
discontinues a lift. If the load remains suspended after postponing or
discontinuing a lift, the crane/hoist operator would have to remain on
duty. This condition would reduce workers' exposure to the suspended-
load hazard by ensuring that the crane/hoist operator remains in
control of the suspended load should workers be in the vicinity of the
load.
    23. Another condition added by OSHA requires a post-lift review of
the suspended-load operation. This condition would protect workers by
assisting NNS in identifying shortcomings in the suspended-load
program.
    24. NNS proposed to develop a listing of the modular-ship section
lift operations (suspended-load operations) scheduled to be performed
during each quarter. OSHA is clarifying this condition by specifying
that by the 15th calendar day of each new quarter NNS would have to
prepare a list of planned modular-ship section lifts to be performed
during the upcoming quarter (including the cranes/hoists used for
suspended-load operations, the date and time of the operation,
associated hazard analysis completed, and the calculated weight of each
lift), and update the list when significant changes occur. OSHA also
specified that workers and their representatives would have access to
the list, and by January 15th of each year, NNS would have to provide
to the Norfolk Area Office and OSHA's Office of Technical Programs and
Coordination Activities a copy of the list. The list requirement
enhances worker safety by ensuring that NNS and workers have the most
recent information on each modular-ship section lift in advance of its
being performed so they have an opportunity to review and become
familiar with the operation's potential hazards and planned hazard
mitigation strategies.
    25. OSHA added a condition requiring that NNS conduct an
investigation of all lift incidents related to suspended-load
operations. This condition would protect workers by ensuring that NNS
investigates such incidents and take actions necessary to prevent a
recurrence.
    26. OSHA included a records-management condition that would assist
the Agency in monitoring and enforcing the variance conditions. This
requirement will protect workers by ensuring that NNS implements and
maintains these conditions.
    27. OSHA also added a condition that requires NNS to provide the
Agency with up-to-date information regarding its corporate status. This
information would permit OSHA to monitor and enforce the conditions to
the benefit of NNS's workers.

IV. Specific Conditions of the Variance Application

    After reviewing the evidence described above, OSHA preliminarily
determined that the proposed conditions would provide a place of
employment as safe and healthful as that provided by the standards from
which NNS is requesting a variance, notably 29 CFR 1915.116(i), (j),
and (q). Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of 29 CFR 1905.11(c),
OSHA is announcing NNS's application for a permanent variance and is
seeking public comment on this application. The application includes
the following conditions:

A. Application

    Except for the requirements specified by Sec.  1915.116(i), (j),
and (q), Newport News Shipbuilding would have to comply fully with all
other safety and health provisions that are applicable to shipyard
employment when implementing the permanent variance.

B. Scope

    1. The variance would only apply to operations that satisfy all of
the following:
    (a) the operations are performed by Newport News Shipbuilding
employees during modular-ship section construction and structural-
repair operations at the company's Newport News, Virginia, facility;
    (b) the operations involve lifting modular-ship sections from the
lift-staging area to a ship during one of the following assembly
phases:
    (i) ``End-to-End'' (horizontal) assembly of modular-ship sections;
    (ii) ``Stacking'' (vertical) assembly of modular-ship sections; or
    (iii) ``Inserting'' (combined vertical/horizontal) assembly of
modular-ship sections.
    (c) the workers exposed to the hazards of the lift are those
supporting modular-ship section lifts and essential employees working
on or under a suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging
modular-ship section and a fixed object, during vessel assembly,
repair, overhaul, and removal of interferences (or obstructions) that
preclude proper alignment and mating of sections (fit-up); and
    (d) Workers are exposed to the hazards of the lift only for a brief
period of time.
    2. The variance would not cover:
    (a) Lifting modular-ship sections in the fabrication (assembly)
shop or area;
    (b) Transporting modular-ship sections from the fabrication
(assembly) shop or area to the lift-staging area;
    (c) Lifting structures or equipment onto a ship's deck; and
    (d) Loads consisting of tools, equipment, or other materials.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In sum, Condition B.2 specifies that there would be no
instances of workers working on or under a suspended modular-ship
section, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed
object, at the assembly shop or area, or while traveling with a
suspended load through the shipyard.

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

    Note:  Under Condition B.1.c, if engineering calculations show
that failure of the crane/hoist or rigging during the lifting
process could dislodge the ship from its supporting blocks (e.g.,
keel blocks, bilge blocks), then all workers, other than those
essential to the modular-ship section alignment and mating
operation, must vacate the ship while the modular ship-section is
suspended during the lifting process. Example: When lifting a
superstructure onto the main deck of a vessel under construction,
should the load fall between the dry dock and ship, then the ship
could dislodge from the supporting blocks; therefore, all workers
other than those essential to the lift would have to vacate the
vessel during the suspended-load operation.

C. Definitions

    The following definitions would apply to the permanent variance,
and do not necessarily apply in other contexts:
    1. Affected employee--a Newport News Shipbuilding employee having a
direct or supporting role in completing a suspended modular-ship
section lift operation (including workers performing tasks such as
crane operator, signal person, supervisor).
    2. Brief period of time--a limited amount of very short duration
that is necessary for employees to work under, in or on the load for
the purposes of alignment or positioning only. This will be limited to
the amount of time necessary to perform the alignment or positioning
operation, or 15 minutes, whichever is less.
    3. Competent person--one who is capable of identifying existing and
predictable hazards in the surrounding or working conditions that are
unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has authority
to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Adapted from 29 CFR 1926.32(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Essential employee--a Newport News Shipbuilding employee
required to work under, in or on a suspended modular-ship section, or
between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object, while
ensuring the proper alignment and mating of modular-ship sections.
Examples of work activities performed by essential employees include,
but are not limited to: adjusting chain falls; confirming clearances
between hull structures and outfitting systems; identifying and
removing interferences; and aligning and mating the section to a ship.
    5. Lift incident--an unplanned event or series of events that
resulted in a work-related recordable injury or illness, or caused or
could cause harm to a worker (includes near-miss events).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 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 updates to OSHA's
recordkeeping rule and Web page ((79 FR 56130); (http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/index.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Lift Plan--a set of written documents that specify the core
requirements for completing a suspended modular-ship section lift. The
following are examples of documents included in a lift plan:
Engineering design; engineering hazard analysis; rigging and lifting
drawings; crane, rigging and other lift support equipment inspection;
operation and maintenance instructions; technical operating procedures;
and work review, justification, and authorization documents. The
documents included in a lift plan are collectively also known as the
operational procedural document.
    7. Modular-ship section--a ship block, section, or module that
includes a portion of two or more of the following structures: deck,
bulkhead, overhead, or hull.
    8. Qualified person--one who, by possession of a recognized degree,
certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive knowledge,
training, and experience, successfully demonstrated an ability to solve
or resolve problems relating to the subject matter, the work, or the
project.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Adapted from 29 CFR 1926.32(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Rigging-lifting-plan drawing--a sketch of the rigging used
whenever essential employees perform a suspended modular-ship section
lift by working under, in or on a suspended load, or between a swinging
load and a fixed object. The sketch is required to include the
following essential information concerning the planned lift: (1) The
number and location of essential employees that are to be on or under
the load; (2) a pictorial illustration of the rigging configuration
with size of all rigging components including load attachment points;
(3) load identification, unit number or description; (4) weight of the
load; (5) gear capacity and asset (crane) number/hook capacity; and (6)
approval line.
    10. Safety-controlled access area--a work area with controlled
access. The periphery of the safety-controlled access area must:
    (a) Be well defined and easily recognizable;
    (b) Have means to keep unauthorized personnel out of the zone such
as appropriate barriers (e.g., rope, cones, safety watches);
    (c) Extend a safe distance beyond the radius of the crane when at
its maximum extended lifting position as determined by a hazard
analysis; and
    (d) Monitored and controlled by a competent person.
    11. Single failure point (SFP) - identification of the critical
components of the crane/hoist system involved in a suspended-load
operation such that malfunction of any single component would provoke a
total systems failure.
    12. Suspended modular-ship-section operation - an operation that
meets all three of the following criteria:
    (a) The operation involves the use of a crane/hoist or cranes/
hoists that support the weight of a suspended modular-ship section,
with no distinction made between static and dynamic loads. The load
consists of all associated rigging equipment, including slings, Hydra
Sets, lifting lugs, shackles, and straps, when attached to the crane
hook; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This condition does not apply to loads supported entirely
by a holding fixture or blocks even though still attached to the
crane and hoist hook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) When workers involved in the operation have any part of their
body directly under the suspended load; \13\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This condition does not apply when workers have their hands
on the sides of a load, e.g., to guide the load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) In the event of a crane or hoist failure (including a rigging
failure), the falling load could contact workers working directly
beneath it, with injury or death as a possible result.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This condition does not apply when the falling load would
push a worker's hand away such that no injury could result, or the
load would come to rest on a holding fixture or block before
injuring a worker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Abbreviations

    Abbreviations used throughout the permanent variance would include:

1. CSP--Certified safety professional
2. FMEA--Failure modes and effects analysis
3. JHA--Job-hazard analysis
4. NASA--National Aeronautics and Space Administration
5. NNS--Newport News Shipbuilding
6. OSHA--Occupational Safety and Health Administration
7. PE--Professional engineer
8. SFP--Single failure point

E. Engineering-Review Requirements

    1. Hazard-avoidance protocol. Using a hazard-avoidance protocol,
NNS would have to design hazards out of the suspended-load operations
covered by the permanent variance to the greatest extent possible.
Accordingly, NNS would:

    (a) Have to engineer, design, install, and operate all future
systems, hardware, and equipment associated with these operations to
prevent exposing workers to the hazards associated with working under,
in or on a suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging
modular-ship section and a fixed object, unless NNS demonstrates that
doing so is technically infeasible;
    (b) Perform an operation in which employees work under, in or on a
suspended modular-ship section, or work between a swinging modular-ship
section and a fixed object, only under specifically approved and
controlled conditions; and
    (c) Perform the operation specified under Condition E.1.b above
only after meeting all the review, approval, documentation, and special
requirements.
    2. Use of properly engineered lashing materials.
    (a) When the operation specified under Condition E.1.b above
involves the use of a crane/hoist that supports the weight of a
modular-ship section, NNS would have to use properly engineered lashing
materials \15\ capable of lifting, moving, and suspending the entire
weight of the load; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Used in accordance with the applicable provisions of 29 CFR
1915 Subpart G--Gear and Equipment for Rigging and Material
Handling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) NNS would have to conduct a detailed weight calculation in
determining whether the lashing material can support the requisite
weight of the load, considering the duration of maintaining the load in
a safe condition in the event of loss of continuous communication, and
paying special consideration to environmental factors that may affect
the load (e.g., water retention, snow, ice).
    3. Engineering-hazard analysis.
    (a) The most senior manager at the site for crane operations
specified in paragraph E.1.b above must approve suspended modular-ship
section load operations in writing based on: a detailed written hazard
analysis, a rigging-lifting-plan, and a supporting drawing of the
operation;
    (b) NNS would have to ensure that the:
    (i) Responsible crane-operations organization prepares the written
engineering-hazards analysis under the direction of the most senior
manager at the site for crane operations; and
    (ii) Qualified representatives of NNS' engineering offices and the
health and safety department review this analysis and indicate approval
by signing the analysis;
    (c) The engineering-hazard analysis would have to be in writing and
include:
    (i) A justification specifying why NNS cannot conduct the operation
without its employees working under, in, or on suspended modular-ship
sections, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed
object, with this justification describing the procedures and design
options NNS considered in determining that it could not conduct the
operation without its employees working under, in, or on a suspended
modular-ship section, or working between a swinging modular-ship
section and a fixed object;
    (ii) Details of the engineering controls taken to prevent the
modular-ship sections from moving or shifting when employees are under,
in, or on a suspended modular-ship section or between a swinging
modular-ship section and a fixed object, including the evaluation of
testing and safety devices used for this purpose;
    4. Secondary support systems. NNS would have to design any
secondary support systems used during the operation specified in
Condition E.1.b above in accordance with recognized engineering
practices and designed with a minimum safety factor of 2 to yield.

F. Limiting Employee Hazard Exposure

    NNS would have to limit employee exposure to the hazards of working
under, in, or on a suspended modular-ship section, or between a
swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object by:
    1. Establishing a safety-controlled access area, taking into
account the swing radius of the crane;
    2. Allowing only essential personnel in the safety-controlled
access area;
    3. Ensuring that the rigging-lifting-plan drawings identify by name
the exact location of each essential employee allowed in the safety-
controlled access area and the location of that employee in the area;
    4. Ensuring that each essential employee allowed in the safety-
controlled access area is in the safest location possible for
performing the work;
    5. Ensuring that each essential employee moves to and from the work
location using the safest route possible, and remains at that location
only long enough to complete the work;
    6. Verifying in writing that procedures are in place to prevent
movement or shifting of the suspended modular-ship section when
essential employees are under, in, or on a suspended modular-ship
section, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object;
and
    7. Ensuring that a crane operator who meets the requirements of 29
CFR 1926.1427 and 1926.1430 is operating the crane used to suspend the
modular-ship section while essential employees are working under, in,
or on a suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging modular-
ship section and a fixed object.

G. Job-Hazard Analysis and Rigging-Lifting Drawings

    Each operation specified under Condition E.1.b above would have a
separate written job-hazard analysis that includes a detailed rigging
specification drawing(s) and a detailed lifting plan drawing(s)
approved and signed by the most senior manager at the site for crane
operations. A separate hazard analysis is not needed for routine and
repetitive operations where a rigging-lifting-plan drawing(s) and
procedures already exist and where no new hazards are present.

H. Failure-Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Approval

    1. Each crane involved in an operation specified under Condition
E.1.b above would undergo a FMEA approved in writing by a Registered
Professional Engineer.
    2. The FMEA would:
    (a) Determine SFPs by assessing the rigging equipment and all
critical mechanical functional components and support systems in the
drive trains and critical electrical components of the crane; and
    (b) Include weight calculations and any structural analysis deemed
necessary by the Registered Professional Engineer responsible for
approving the FMEA.
    3. For cranes and rigging equipment identified as not having any
SFPs, the failure of which would result in movement of the modular-ship
section, the total weight of the suspended modular-ship section load
would not exceed the crane's rated load.
    4. For those cranes and rigging equipment identified as having an
SFP, the failure of which would result in movement of the modular-ship
section, the most senior manager at the site for crane operations and a
qualified representative of the health and safety department would have
to approve in writing use of the crane and rigging equipment for an
operation specified under Condition E.1.b above after reviewing all the
documentation required by this order that addresses the operation,
including the FMEA.

I. Operational Procedural Document (Lift Plan)

    NNS would have to:
    1. Develop and maintain written procedures that specify the
requirements for an operation specified under Condition E.1.b above.
    2. Revise the written detailed job-hazard analysis, rigging-
lifting-plan drawing(s), and the operational-procedures documents
(e.g., operations and maintenance instruction, technical operating
procedure, work authorization document, FMEA) to specify any additional
requirements identified by the job-hazard analysis.
    3. Review any revisions made under Condition I.2 above with
essential employees and make these revisions available on-site during
an operation specified by Condition E.1.b above for inspection by
affected employees, employee representatives, or OSHA personnel.

J. New or Unforeseen Work Activity

    During an operation under Condition E.1.b above, if a new or
unforeseen work activity or circumstance not covered by the original
operational-procedural documents (e.g., job-hazard analysis, rigging-
lifting-plan drawing(s), operations and maintenance instruction,
technical operating procedure, work authorization document, FMEA)
arises, then NNS would have to:
    1. Immediately stop the lift and lower the modular-ship section to
the ground or other supporting structure;
    2. Before continuing the operation, obtain approval in writing from
the most senior manager at the site for crane operation and the health
and safety department to revise the operations; and
    3. Before repeating the operation on a subsequent occasion, prepare
revised operational-procedures documents (e.g., job-hazard analysis,
rigging-lifting-plan drawing(s), operations and maintenance
instruction, technical operating procedure, work authorization
document, and FMEA) and obtain the approvals required of these
documents.

K. Operational Requirements

    1. A Registered Professional Engineer would have to develop and
approve inspection, testing, and maintenance procedures, and competent
persons would have to perform the procedures and resolve noted
discrepancies.
    2. An independent third-party such as an accredited agency under
OSHA's Gear Certification program (29 CFR 1919) would have to inspect
all cranes and rigging equipment not more than one year before the
modular-ship section lift being performed, and NNS would have to
maintain the inspection results, and make them available to OSHA upon
request.
    3. The engineers who design the modular-ship section subject to the
operation specified under Condition E.1.b above would have to design or
approve the pad-eye (lifting-lugs) connection points on the section,
and specify the size (length and diameter) of wire-rope slings that
would lift, move, and handle the section.
    4. Before using lifting pad-eyes and other welded lifting
connection points in the operation, NNS would have to perform non-
destructive tests on these pad-eyes and connections according to
nationally recognized non-destructive testing methods.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See footnote 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. NNS would have to:
    (a) Document the design specifications pertinent to the operation
on engineering drawings;
    (b) Ensure that these drawing accompany the modular-ship section
during an operation specified under Condition E.1.b above; and
    (c) Make the drawings available to the crane foreman/supervisor.

L. Pre-Lift Inspections and Test Lift \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ NNS must perform the pre-lift inspections specified below
in addition to the inspections required by Sec. Sec.  1910.179(j),
.180(d), and 1915.111, which apply to cranes in maritime facilities
(see 1910.5). The pre-lift inspection and test is in addition to the
inspections and/or testing required by other safety procedures or
daily operator checks specified under these conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Before lifting the modular-ship section involved in an operation
specified under Condition E.1.b above, the components of the crane and
rigging equipment involved in lifting the load would have to undergo a
visual inspection (without major disassembly, and documented with a
written checklist).
    2. NNS would have to resolve any discrepancies identified in this
visual inspection before initiating an operation.
    3. Before lifting modular-ship sections for assembly with the ship,
a qualified person(s) would have to:
    (a) Perform an inspection to identify and remove interferences to
proper mating; and
    (b) Use a written checklist to document the inspection, including
the removal of litter, tools, and any other unnecessary or unsecured
equipment or items.
    4. Before initiating an operation specified under Condition E.1.b
above, NNS would have to:
    (a) Conduct a test lift that consists of lifting the modular-ship
section one to three feet above the lift staging area for five minutes;
and
    (b) Ensure that all safety devices identified in the modular-ship
section lift plan are operational during the test lift.

M. Crane Operator

    1. NNS would ensure that the crane operator who meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1926.1427 and 1926.1430 remains at the crane
controls at all times during an operation specified under Condition
E.1.b above.
    2. Unless specifically authorized and required by the lift plan,
the operator would:
    (a) Not initiate movement of the suspended modular-ship section
while an employee(s) is under, in, or on a modular-ship section, or
between a swinging load and a fixed object,
    (b) Engage all safety devices such as brakes, dogs, or stops in
accordance with the lifting plan when an employee(s) is under, in, or
on a modular-ship section, or between a swinging load and a fixed
object.

N. Safety-Controlled Access Areas

    NNS would have to:
    1. Establish safety-controlled access areas for all operations
specified by Condition E.1.b above.
    2. Ensure that all non-essential personnel remain outside the
safety-controlled access areas.

    Note:  When engaged in an operation specified under Condition
E.1.b above, if engineering calculations show that a failure of the
crane or rigging during the lifting process could result in
dislodging the ship from its supporting blocks (e.g., keel blocks,
bilge blocks), then all personnel, other than essential employees
necessary for aligning and mating the modular-ship section, must
vacate the ship during the operation and remain outside the safety-
controlled access area. Example: When lifting a superstructure onto
the main deck of a vessel under construction, dropping the load
between the dry dock and ship could knock the ship off of the
supporting blocks; therefore, all workers other than essential
employees required to align and mate the modular-ship section to the
ship must vacate the vessel and remain outside the safety-controlled
access area during the operation.

O. Working Under, In, or On Suspended Modular-Ship Section, or Working
Between a Swinging Modular-Ship Section and a Fixed Object

    1. NNS's essential employees may be under, in, or on a suspended
modular-ship section, or between a swinging modular-ship section and a
fixed object, only while ensuring the proper alignment and mating of
modular-ship sections. Examples of work activities

include, but are not limited to: adjusting chain falls, confirming
clearances between hull structures and outfitting systems, identifying
and removing interferences, and aligning and mating the section to a
ship.
    2. Only essential employees authorized by the most senior manager
at the site for crane operations (e.g., rigging foreman or supervisor)
may be under, in, or on a suspended modular-ship section, or between a
swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object.

P. Training

    1. NNS would have to develop and implement a worker training
program to instruct affected employees in the:
    (a) Hazards associated with performing work under, in, or on
suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging modular-ship
section and a fixed object; and
    (b) The controls mandated to protect affected employees from these
hazards.
    2. NNS would have to train and instruct the crane foreman/
supervisor to strictly adhere to the lift plan and the rigging
specifications on the approved drawings.
    3. NNS would have to develop and implement a refresher training
program, conducted periodically and as necessary, for all employees
working under, in, or on suspended modular-ship section, or between a
swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object. At a minimum, the
refresher training would:
    (a) Consist of a lift briefing;
    (b) Review each employee's responsibilities; and
    (c) Take place before initiating the operation.
    4. NNS would have to document all training provided under the
permanent variance, and maintain training records as specified below
under Condition U.2.a.

Q. Briefing

    Prior to conducting an operation in which its employees work under,
in, or on suspended modular-ship section, or between a swinging
modular-ship section and a fixed object, NNS would have to:
    1. Hold the briefing with all affected employees having a direct or
supporting role in the operation (including workers and/or contractors
performing tasks such as crane operator, signal person, essential
employees, supervisors), to review the operational procedures involved
in the operation, including procedures for entering and leaving the
safety-controlled access area;
    2. Use the written job-hazard analysis and rigging-lifting-plan
drawing(s) during the briefing to supplement the information;
    3. Cover all safety considerations;
    4. Ensure that the employees understand the information provided at
the briefing; and
    5. Document the briefing using a signed roster of attendees, and
maintain the roster as specified at Condition U.2.a.

R. Continuous Communication

    NNS would have to:
    1. Maintain communications (voice, radio, hard wired, or visual)
between the crane/hoist operator(s), signal person(s), and employees
working under, in, or on the suspended modular-ship section, or between
a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object, at all times;
    2. Upon losing communications, stop the operation immediately,
inform employees of the problem, ensure that the employees exit the
safety-controlled access area, and that the modular-ship section is in
a safe condition (e.g., prevented from inadvertent movement or shifting
while suspended or returned to the lift staging area if restoring
communications takes longer than the load can remain safely suspended
as determined in Condition E.2.b above); and
    3. Commence the operation only after restoring communications and
informing the affected employees about what action NNS is taking to
avoid a reoccurrence.

S. Continuous Visual Observation

    The most senior manager at the site for crane operations or
designee (e.g., supervisor controlling the lift) must have continuous
sight of and be in constant visual communication with, any essential
employees working under, in, or on a suspended modular-ship section, or
between a swinging modular-ship section and a fixed object.

T. Post-Lift Review and Incident Investigations

    1. Post-lift review. NNS would have to conduct and document a post-
lift review for each operation involving a suspended modular-ship
section, including the identification of any incident that occurred
during the operation.
    2. Lift-incident investigation. NNS would have to investigate each
lift incident. In doing so, NNS would have to:
    (a) Initiate the investigation within 8 hours of the lift incident
or 8 hours after becoming aware of the incident;
    (b) Have a competent person(s) with expertise in the hazards
associated with the operations involved in the incident conduct the
investigation;
    (c) Have the investigator(s) prepare a written report at the
conclusion of the investigation which includes, at a minimum, the date
of the incident, the date the investigation began, the date of the
report, the location of the incident, the equipment or processes
involved, a description of the incident, the root cause, the
contributing factors, and any corrective actions resulting from the
investigation (the completed OSHA 301 Incident Report form may be used
for this purpose); \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See footnote 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) Provide a copy of the report to OSHA's Norfolk Area Office and
OTPCA at OSHA's National Office within 15 calendar days of the incident
or 15 calendar days after becoming aware of the incident;
    (e) Within 15 calendar days of completing the incident report,
address the findings of the report and implement corrective actions;
    (f) Document in writing the corrective actions taken;
    (g) Review the findings of the report and corrective actions taken
with all affected workers; and
    (h) Provide certification to OSHA's Norfolk Area Office and OTPCA
at OSHA's National Office within 15 calendar days of completing the
incident report, that the employer 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).

U. Records

    1. By the 15th calendar day of each new quarter, NNS would have to
prepare a list of planned modular-ship section lifts to be performed
during the upcoming quarter (including the cranes/hoists used, the date
and time of the operation, associated hazard analysis completed, and
the calculated weight of the lift), and update the list when
significant changes occur. NNS would have to:
    (a) Make this document available for inspection by affected
employees, employee representatives, and OSHA upon request; and
    (b) By January 15 of each year, NNS would have to provide to the
Norfolk Area Office and OTPCA, a copy of the list of approved
suspended-load operations completed the previous year.
    2. NNS would have to:
    (a) Retain all records required by the permanent variance for five
years from the time it generates each such record

(except when applicable regulations define a longer records-retention
period); and
    (b) Make all records and related documents available for inspection
by affected employees, employee representatives, and OSHA upon request.

V. Notice to OSHA

    NNS would have to:
    1. Inform OTPCA as soon as it has knowledge that it will:
    (a) Cease to do business; or
    (b) Transfer the activities covered by this permanent variance to a
successor company.
    2. Submit to the Norfolk Area Office and OTPCA, a copy of any
incident-investigation report and associated corrective-action plan
within 15 working days of the incident.
    3. Submit to OTPCA annually, a written certification indicating
whether the conditions of the permanent variance are effective and
remain relevant and necessary, and any recommendations for modifying
these conditions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, 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 July 23, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-18468 Filed 7-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P