[Federal Register: September 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 171)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 54064-54069]
[DOCID:fr03se10-27]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1908

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0010]
RIN 1218-AC32

Consultation Agreements: Proposed Changes to Consultation
Procedures

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

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA is proposing to revise its regulations for the federally-
funded On-site Consultation Program to: Clarify the ability of the
Assistant Secretary to define sites which would receive inspections
regardless of Safety and Health Achievement and Recognition Program
(SHARP) exemption status; allow Compliance Safety and Health Officers
to proceed with enforcement visits resulting from referrals at sites
undergoing Consultation visits and at sites that have been awarded
SHARP status; and, limit the deletion period from OSHA's programmed
inspection schedule for those employers participating in the SHARP
program.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before November 2,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may submit comments, identified by
docket number OSHA-2010-0010, or regulatory information number (RIN)
1218-AC32, by any of the following methods:
    Electronically: You may submit comments, and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions on-line for making
electronic submissions;
    Fax: If your submission, including attachments, does not exceed 10
pages,

you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger or courier service:
You must submit your comments, and attachments to the OSHA Docket
Office, Docket Number OSHA-2010-0010, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202) 693-2350 (OSHA's TTY number is<PHONE_NUMBER>). Deliveries (hand,
express mail, messenger and courier service) are accepted during the
Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15
a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions for submitting comments: All submissions must include
the docket number (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0010) or the RIN number (RIN
1218-AC32) for this rulemaking. Because of security-related procedures,
submission by regular mail may result in significant delay. Please
contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures for making submissions by hand delivery, express delivery
and messenger or courier service.
    All comments, including any personal information you provide, are
placed in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions you
about submitting personal information such as social security numbers
and birthdates. For further information on submitting comments, plus
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this notice.
    Docket: To read or download submissions in response to this Federal
Register notice, go to docket number OSHA-2010-0010, at http://
www.regulations.gov. All submissions 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 that
Web page. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
    Electronic copies of this Federal Register document are available
at http://www.regulations.gov. This document as well as news releases
and other relevant information, is available at OSHA's Web page at
http://www.osha.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For press inquiries: MaryAnn Garrahan,
Acting Director, OSHA, Office of Communications, Room N-3647, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. For general and technical information:
Steven F. Witt, Director, OSHA Directorate of Cooperative and State
Programs, Room N-3700, U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background: The OSHA On-Site Consultation Program

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), through
cooperative agreements with agencies in 48 states, the District of
Columbia and several U.S. territories, administers and provides Federal
funding for the On-site Consultation Program. In the states of Kentucky
and Washington, and in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, on-site
consultation services are provided to employers in the private sector
as part of an OSHA-approved state plan funded by Federal grants under
section 23(g) of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act. The On-
site Consultation Program provides well-trained professional safety and
health personnel, at no cost and upon request of an employer, to
conduct worksite visits to identify occupational hazards and provide
advice on compliance with OSHA regulations and standards. Priority in
providing on-site consultation visits is accorded to smaller employers
in more hazardous industries.
    The On-site Consultation Program was first authorized by
Congressional appropriations action in 1974. On July 16, 1998, The On-
site Consultation Program was codified as a new subsection of 21(d) of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act with the enactment of the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration Compliance Assistance
Authorization Act (CAAA), Public Law 105-197. OSHA's On-site
Consultation Program is administered in accordance with regulations at
Sec.  1908. These regulations provide, among other things, rules and
procedures for State consultants performing worksite visits. Following
the successful completion of an on-site consultation visit, employers
may seek to participate in OSHA Consultation's SHARP (Safety and Health
Achievement Recognition Program). The program recognizes employers who
have demonstrated exemplary achievements in workplace safety and health
by receiving a comprehensive safety and health consultation visit,
correcting all workplace safety and health hazards, adopting and
implementing effective safety and health management systems, and
agreeing to request further consultative visits if major changes in
working conditions or processes occur that may introduce new hazards.
Part 1908 currently allows employers meeting these specific program
requirements an exemption from programmed OSHA inspections for one
year.
    In this Federal Register notice, OSHA proposes revisions to these
rules and procedures, as well as poses questions, and requests
interested members of the public to submit any data, views, or
arguments relevant to these proposed changes, during a 60-day public
comment period.

II. Proposed Changes to 29 CFR Part 1908

Revisions Delineating the Relationship With OSHA Enforcement

1. Other Critical Inspections
    Under current Sec.  1908.7(b)(4)(ii), although worksites granted
Safety and Health Achievement Recognition Program (SHARP) status and
those working towards achieving SHARP status (Pre-SHARP) are either
deleted or deferred from the programmed inspection lists, they are
still eligible for non-programmed inspections in the following
categories:
    A. Imminent danger.
    B. Fatality/Catastrophe.
    C. Formal Complaints.
    At times, however, special circumstances may make it necessary to
conduct an inspection or investigation at an establishment ordinarily
exempt because of the employer's participation in the OSHA On-site
Consultation Program. One such situation might arise in connection with
workplace accidents that generate widespread public concern about a
particular hazard or substance. As part of a national response to these
hazards, OSHA may need to conduct programmed inspections of all sites
within a specific industry. An onsite OSHA investigation might also be
appropriate in the rare circumstance where a subsequent accident or
other event at a particular establishment makes it advisable for OSHA
to revisit the site. For this reason OSHA is proposing the addition of
a fourth category, ``other critical inspections as determined by the
Assistant Secretary,'' to the list of permissible inspections for
worksites which have otherwise been deleted or deferred from programmed
inspection lists as a result of SHARP or Pre-SHARP participation.
Although Section 21(d) does not contain an explicit exception to allow
for programmed inspections under these

circumstances, it does allow OSHA discretion related to programmed
exceptions by stating that an employer ``may'' be exempt from an
inspection if the employer meets the criteria for recognition and
exemption delineated by the statute. This addition is also consistent
with current requirements of part 1908, as this particular exception
already exists in Sec.  1908.7(b)(2)(iv), which provides the same
criteria for termination of an ``in progress'' consultation visit. It
is not possible to define or predict every circumstance where an
investigation may be necessary at a site that is deferred or deleted
from OSHA's programmed inspection lists as a result of consultation
activity; accordingly, the exception is worded in very general terms.
To ensure this exception is applied only in exceptional circumstances
where an onsite investigation is clearly warranted, such investigations
must be approved by the Assistant Secretary.
    In addition, current Sec.  1908.7(b)(2) is internally inconsistent
with the provisions related to pre-SHARP and SHARP in its use of the
term ``Complaints'' as opposed to ``Formal Complaints'' used in current
Sec.  1908.7(b)(4)(ii) when describing the categories in which an
employer with an in-progress consultation visit may be subject to
termination of the visit and a subsequent enforcement inspection. While
such distinctions do exist between the terms ``Formal Complaints'' and
``Complaints,'' OSHA general enforcement policy treats all types of
complaints in a similar fashion. As a result, OSHA does not need to
distinguish between Formal Complaints and Complaints when ascertaining
the need to interrupt ``in progress'' or SHARP visits. Therefore, for
consistency, OSHA is proposing to use the same language and
descriptions for the interruptions to all consultation visits.
2. Referrals
    OSHA proposes to add a new category which will allow for
termination of an in-progress onsite consultative visit, as well as
enforcement inspections at worksites that are otherwise in pre-SHARP or
SHARP status. Under the current provisions of part 1908, enforcement
activity may be initiated under the following categories:
    (i) Imminent danger investigations;
    (ii) Fatality/catastrophe investigations;
    (iii) Complaint investigations;
    (iv) Other critical inspections as determined by the Assistant
Secretary.
    Current OSHA enforcement policy allows inspections to be initiated
following a referral and are considered a type of non-programmed
inspection, similar to a complaint. In some instances, referrals may
identify hazards or suspected hazards that will necessitate termination
of consultation activity to allow for a non-programmed enforcement
inspection of that particular worksite. With this change, referrals
will now be a basis to initiate enforcement activity at worksites
subject to deferrals or deletions from programmed inspections as a
result of either an in progress consultation visit, or a worksite in
pre-SHARP or SHARP status. As a result of the above changes,
unprogrammed inspections will be treated consistently for ``in
progress'' interruptions and interruptions of SHARP and Pre-SHARP
status, and will occur at the discretion of the Regional Administrator
(RA).
3. Removal From Programmed Inspection Schedules
    OSHA is proposing to revise paragraph Sec.  1908.7(b)(4),
Programmed Inspection Schedule, to change the deletion period from
OSHA's programmed inspections list. The regulation currently states
that employers will have their names removed from OSHA's programmed
inspection schedule for a period of ``not less than one year.'' Today's
proposed rule would amend the wording in part 1908 to more closely
conform to the exemption period prescribed by section 21(d) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act, and would provide that an employer
that meets the requirements set forth in section 21(d) will have the
name of its establishment removed from the general schedule inspection
list for a period of one year.
    The proposed rule would also address the issue of inspection
exemptions beyond one year. While 21(d) authorizes a one-year exemption
for a consultation participant that successfully meets the listed
criteria, OSHA retains wide discretion under other provisions of the
OSH Act to set priorities and establish inspection schedules. Section
8(g) of the Act empowers OSHA to issue rules and regulations dealing
with the inspection of work establishments. Department of Labor v. Kast
Metals Corp. 744 F.2d 1145, 1151 (5th Cir. 1984). The agency will never
have sufficient staff to inspect every establishment, and has authority
under the OSH Act to schedule programmed inspections in a way that
makes efficient use of its compliance resources where they can have the
greatest impact on worker safety. Industrial Steel Prod. Co. v. OSHA,
845 F.2d 1330, 1331 (5th Cir. 1988). Rearranging the priority of
particular establishments within an inspection plan is reasonable and
permissible ``because it furthers OSHA's legitimate goal of efficient
resource allocation.'' Id. Many specialized inspection plans developed
by OSHA, such as National Emphasis Programs, require investigation of
hazards that potentially exist at many thousands of establishments
across the country. Having the resources to conduct only a finite
number of programmed inspections, OSHA must direct its resources to
those establishments most likely to present uncorrected hazards. Thus,
for example, instead of inspecting a facility that has had a wall-to-
wall visit by an On-site Consultation professional in the past two
years, OSHA may reasonably decide to inspect an establishment that has
had no OSHA intervention of any kind. Accordingly, existing policy
allows for deletion periods extending beyond one year.
    While acknowledging OSHA's lawful discretion to establish
inspection programs that provide for deletions from the programmed
inspection schedule beyond the basic one-year programmed inspection
deletion under 21(d), the proposed rule would place a one-year limit on
such additional deletions. An employer's fulfillment of the SHARP
participation requirements involve completing all the steps described
in 21(d), a process that can take three years or more. Small
businesses, which are the focus of the consultation program, are
extremely dynamic and changeable. Small enterprises can more quickly
change their operations, equipment and safety procedures without the
investment of time and materials that a larger business might require.
    OSHA recognizes that employer participation in voluntary programs
such as SHARP contributes greatly to the statutory goal of eliminating
hazards, and enables the agency to better allocate its scarce
compliance resources. However, it is also important that OSHA retain
authority to conduct programmed inspections, and that establishments be
aware they may be the subject of such an inspection. Such awareness may
itself be an incentive for vigorous compliance efforts. See Reich v.
OSHRC, 102 F.3d 1200, 1203 (11th Cir. 1997). On balance, OSHA believes
that, after the expiration of the one-year inspection exemption
provided under 21(d), the name of an establishment may be deleted from
the programmed inspection schedule for no more than one additional
year.

4. Clarification of Terminology
    Along with the changes proposed above, OSHA also wishes to clarify
terminology used in Part 1908. Thus, the types of enforcement
exemptions for which a worksite may be eligible after receiving a
safety and health consultation visit should be defined and described in
the same terminology used in the Site Specific Targeting (SST) and
other OSHA enforcement guidance. OSHA is proposing, for consistency
with terminology used in enforcement programs such as the SST, to use
the terms ``deferral'' and ``deletion'' when describing exemptions from
programmed inspections. Any deferrals and deletions are subject to the
time periods specified in the proposal and not limited by inspection
lists under the SST.

III. Preliminary Economic Analysis

    OSHA's On-site Consultation Program is voluntary, both for
employers who seek this no-cost service and for States that provide it.
The goal of the proposed revisions to existing Consultation Agreement
regulations is to: (a) Clarify the ability of the Assistant Secretary
to define sites which would receive inspections regardless of Safety
and Health Achievement and Recognition Program (SHARP) exemption
status; (b) allow Compliance Safety and Health Officers to proceed with
enforcement visits resulting from referrals at sites undergoing
Consultation visits and at sites that have been awarded SHARP status;
(c) limit the deletion period from OSHA's programmed inspection
schedule for those employers participating in the SHARP program. OSHA
finds that the proposed revisions will not impose any new cost on
affected employers.
    The Agency has not quantified the potential cost reductions to
employers or benefits to employees from the proposed revisions to the
existing rule. The Agency has preliminarily concluded that no
additional costs will be imposed on employers who choose to utilize
State On-site Consultation project services and, therefore, no adverse
economic impact on those employers is foreseen.

IV. Executive Order 12866

    In terms of economic impact, the rule being proposed does not
constitute an economically significant regulation within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866, because it does not have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more; materially affect any single sector of
the economy; interfere with the programs of other Agencies; materially
affect the budgetary impact of grant or entitlement programs; nor
result in other adverse effects of the kind specified in the Executive
Order.

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The On-site Consultation Program is designed to aid small
employers, the same population identified for the protections of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Since the
proposed revisions do not impose new costs on small employers, the
Assistant Secretary certifies that the regulation will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Participation in the On-site Consultation Program both by States and
employers is voluntary. State agencies that have elected to furnish On-
site Consultation services under cooperative agreements with OSHA are
not covered entities under the RFA. Since the On-site Consultation
Program is historically targeted to small, high-hazard workplaces,
employers affected by the rule would tend to include a substantial
number of small entities, but, as indicated in the foregoing discussion
of regulatory impacts, the proposal should have no measurable economic
impact on employers.

VI. Environmental Impact

    The proposed standard has been reviewed in accordance with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR part 1500), and Department of Labor
(DOL) NEPA Procedures (29 CFR part 11). The provisions of the rule
focus on policies pertaining to exemptions from programmed OSHA
inspections. Consequently, no major negative impact associated with the
rule is foreseen on air, water or soil quality, plant or animal life,
the use of land or other aspects of the environment.

VII. Unfunded Mandates

    For the purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, as
well as Executive Order 12875, this proposed rule does not include any
Federal mandate that may result in increased expenditures by State,
local, and/or tribal governments, or increased expenditures by the
private sector of more than $100 million in any year.

VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    After a thorough analysis of the proposed revisions to part 1908,
OSHA believes that the proposal imposes no new collection-of-
information requirements (i.e., paperwork). The current collections-of-
information for On-site Consultation Agreements (part 1908) are
approved under Office of Management and Budget Control Number 1218-
0110.
    The proposed rule clarifies the ability of the Assistant Secretary
to define sites which would receive inspections, allows referrals to
initiate inspections at sites that are currently undergoing a
consultative visit, and asks the question as to how long a deletion
period from the programmed OSHA inspection schedule for those employers
working towards or participating in OSHA's recognition and exemption
program should last.
    On-site Consultation Program visits generally impose no paperwork
requirements on employers. Specifically, all that is asked of the
employer is that the employer agrees to correct all serious hazards
identified during the inspection and post a list of serious hazards
identified during the visit. Alternatively (as noted in the On-site
Consultation Agreements' approved collection of information package
1218-0110), there is a paperwork burden on the State Consultation
Projects. However, the paperwork burden on the States comes from the
On-site Consultation visit process. The proposed changes to Part 1908
will not affect the consultation process, but rather only the benefits
of the program to employers. As a result, since the consultation
process remains exactly the same, no new or additional paperwork burden
will be imposed on the States as a result of the proposed changes to
the rule.
    Interested parties who wish to comment on OSHA's determination that
this proposal contains no additional paperwork requirements must send
their written comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for OSHA, Office of Management and
Budget, Room 10235, 726 Jackson Place, NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Parties are also encouraged to submit their comments on this paperwork
determination to OSHA along with any other comments on the proposed
rule.

IX. Federalism

    The proposed revisions to part 1908 have been reviewed under
Executive Order 12612, Federalism (52 FR 41685; October 30, 1987),
which sets forth fundamental federalism principles, federalism
policymaking criteria, and provides for consultation by Federal
agencies with state or local governments when policies are being
formulated

which potentially affect them. Federal OSHA meets regularly with
representatives of state-operated On-site Consultation Programs, both
individually and at meetings of the National Association of
Occupational Safety and Health Consultation Programs (OSHCON). OSHA
also maintains extensive and frequent communications with its State
Plan partner agencies, both individual States and through the
Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association (OSHSPA), the
association of State Plan States. The issues covered by the proposed
revisions to part 1908 have been discussed with the States. The States
also have an opportunity to submit comments during the 60-day public
comment period.
    The revisions to part 1908 being proposed are generally consistent
with the requirements and procedures under which OSHA and the States
have administered the On-site Consultation Program for many years. OSHA
has reviewed the proposed revisions and finds them to be consistent
with the policymaking criteria outlined in Executive Order 12612. It
should be noted that cooperative agreements pursuant to section 21(d)
of the OSH Act, and State Plans submitted and approved under section 18
of the Act, are entirely voluntary Federal programs which do not
involve imposition of an intergovernmental mandate [2 U.S.C. 1502,
658(5)]. Under Sec.  1908.1(c) States and territories operating
approved Plans under section 18 of the Act shall, in accordance with
sections 18(b) and 18(c)(2), establish enforcement policies applicable
to the safety and health issues covered by the State Plan, which are at
least as effective as the enforcement policies established by this
part, including: (1) A recognition and exemption program, (2)
inspection deferral policies for employers working to achieve
recognition and exemption status, and (3) policies for continuing
inspections.

X. Public Participation

    Interested persons including State Consultation agencies, employers
and employees who have experience with or an interest in the On-site
Consultation Program are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments with respect to the proposed amendments part 1908 during a
60-day public comment period. OSHA is interested, among other things,
in the experiences of State Consultation agencies and other affected
parties regarding the following matters:

--How would allowing the Assistant Secretary to define sites which
would receive inspections regardless of SHARP status affect the
willingness of employers to seek SHARP recognition?
--How would including referrals as a reason to interrupt Consultation
visits affect employers' willingness to seek On-site Consultation
Program services?
--How would limiting the deletion period from the programmed inspection
list for employers achieving SHARP affect the On-site Consultation
Program?
--What would be the implications of eliminating the awarding of
deferrals for those working to achieve SHARP recognition status?
--Are there different resource implications dependent on the length of
the deletion period?

    Comments must be received on or before November 2, 2010, and two
copies must be submitted to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-
2010-0010, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210. Comments under 10 pages long may be
sent via FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> but must be followed by an original in a
mailed submission. Written submissions must clearly identify the issue
addressed and the position taken with regard to each issue. All
comments submitted to the docket during this proceeding will be open
for public inspection and copying at the location specified above.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1908

    Occupational safety and health, Programmed inspection schedule,
Deletion program, Recognition and exemption, Inspections.

Authority and Signature

    This document was prepared under the direction of David Michaels,
PhD MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and
Health. It is issued under sections 7(c), 8, 18, 21(d) and 23(g) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656, 657, 667,
670 672) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 6-96 (62 FR 111), January
2, 1997; No. 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159).

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of August 2010.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

    Part 1908 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations is hereby
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 1908--CONSULTATION AGREEMENTS--[AMENDED]

    1. Revise the authority citation for part 1908 to read as follows:

    Authority: Sections 7(c), 8, 18, 21(d) and 23(g) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656, 657, 667,
670 672) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 6-96 (62 FR 111); No. 3-
2000 (65 FR 50017), No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159).

    2. In Sec.  1908.1, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  1908.1  Purpose and scope.

* * * * *
    (c) States operating approved Plans under section 18 of the Act
shall, in accord with section 18(b), establish enforcement policies
applicable to the safety and health issues covered by the State Plan
which are at least as effective as the enforcement policies established
by this part, including:
    (1) A recognition and exemption program (Sec.  1908.7(b)(4)(i)(B));
    (2) Inspection deferral policies for employers working to achieve
recognition and exemption status (Sec.  1908.7(b)(4)(i)(A)); and
    (3) Policies for continuing inspections at worksites that have
received exemption status (Sec.  1908.7(b)(4)(ii)).
    3. In Sec.  1908.7, revise paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(4)(i), and
(b)(4)(ii) to read as follows:

Sec.  1908.7  Relationship to enforcement.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) The Consultant shall terminate an onsite consultative visit
already in progress where one of the following kinds of OSHA compliance
inspections is about to take place:
    (i) Imminent danger inspections;
    (ii) Fatality/catastrophe inspections;
    (iii) Complaint inspections;
    (iv) Referral inspections as determined necessary by the RA;
    (iv) Other critical inspections as determined by the Assistant
Secretary.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) Deletion, Deferral, Recognition and Exemption Programs--(A)
Preparation for Recognition and Exemption Program. When an employer
requests participation in a recognition and exemption program, and
undergoes a consultative visit covering all conditions and operations
in the place of employment related to occupational safety and health;
corrects all hazards that were identified during the course of the
consultative visit within established time frames; has begun to
implement all the elements of an effective safety and health program;
and agrees to request a

consultative visit if major changes in working conditions or work
processes occur which may introduce new hazards, OSHA's Programmed
Inspections at that particular site may be deferred while the employer
is working to achieve recognition and exemption status.
    (B) Employers who meet all the requirements for recognition and
exemption will have the names of their establishments removed from
OSHA's Programmed Inspection Schedule for a period of one year. The
exemption period will extend from the date of issuance by the Regional
Office of the certificate of recognition. OSHA may in its discretion
establish inspection programs that provide for an additional deletion
period, but such additional deletion period shall not exceed one year.
    (ii) Inspections. OSHA will continue to make inspections in the
following categories at sites that achieved recognition status and have
been granted deletions from OSHA's Programmed Inspection Schedule; and
at sites granted inspection deferrals as provided for under paragraph
(b)(4)(i)(A) of this section:
    (A) Imminent danger inspections;
    (B) Fatality/catastrophe inspections;
    (C) Complaint inspections;
    (D) Referral inspections as determined necessary by the RA;
    (E) Other critical inspections as determined by the Assistant
Secretary.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-22058 Filed 9-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


program for each
                                      pretreatment compliance
                                      monitoring activity
                                      (e.g., inspections,
                                      audits) by the regulatory
                                      authority. These unique
                                      codes include: (1)
                                      Failure to enforce
                                      against pass through and/
                                      or interference; (2)
                                      failure to submit
                                      required reports within
                                      30 days; (3) failure to
                                      meet compliance schedule
                                      milestones within 90
                                      days; (4) failure to
                                      issue/reissue control
                                      mechanisms to 90% of SIUs
                                      within 6 months; (5)
                                      failure to inspect or
                                      sample 80% of SIUs within
                                      the past 12 months; and
                                      (6) failure to enforce
                                      standards and reporting
                                      requirements.
Deficiencies Identified Through the  This is the unique code/    122.41(h),             1.
 Sewer Overflow/Bypass Compliance     description that that       122.41(l)(6) and
 Monitoring.                          identifies each             (7), 122.43, 123.26,
                                      deficiency in the POTW's    123.41(a), and CWA
                                      control of combined sewer   sections 308 and
                                      overflows, sanitary sewer   402(q)(1).
                                      overflows, or bypass
                                      events for each
                                      compliance monitoring
                                      activity (e.g.,
                                      inspections, audits) by
                                      the regulatory authority.
                                      This data element
                                      includes unique codes to
                                      identify when a POTW has
                                      failed to provide 24-hour
                                      notification to the NPDES
                                      permitting authority or
                                      failed to submit the
                                      Sewer Overflow/Bypass
                                      Event Report within the
                                      required 5-day period.
                                      This data element also
                                      includes unique codes to
                                      identify when the POTW
                                      failed to comply with any
                                      applicable long-term CSO
                                      control plan, permit
                                      requirements, or
                                      enforcement actions.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Compliance Monitoring Activity Information (Data Elements Specific to Sewage Sludge/Biosolids Annual Program
                                                    Reports)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Biosolids or Sewage Sludge--         This data element is        503.18, 503.28,        4.
 Violations.                          applicable to facilities    503.48.
                                      that use land
                                      application, active
                                      surface disposal site
                                      (e.g., monofills, surface
                                      impoundments, lagoons,
                                      waste piles, dedicated
                                      disposal sites, and
                                      dedicated beneficial use
                                      sites), and/or
                                      incineration. This data
                                      element uses one or more
                                      unique codes/descriptions
                                      to identify all
                                      violations. This includes
                                      violations of additional
                                      or more stringent
                                      requirements (40 CFR
                                      503.5), sampling and
                                      analysis requirements (40
                                      CFR 503.8), land
                                      application requirements
                                      (40 CFR 503, Subpart B),
                                      surface disposal
                                      requirements (40 CFR 503,
                                      Subpart C), pathogen and
                                      vector attraction
                                      reduction requirements
                                      (40 CFR 503, Subpart D),
                                      and incineration
                                      requirements (40 CFR 503,
                                      Subpart E).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (1) The NPDES program authority may pre-populate these data elements and other data elements (e.g.,
  Federal Registry System ID) in the NPDES electronic reporting systems in order to create efficiencies and
  standardization. For example, the NPDES program authority may configure their electronic reporting system to
  automatically generate NPDES IDs for control mechanisms for new facilities reported on a Pretreatment Program
  Report [40 CFR 403.12(i)]. Additionally, the NPDES program authority can decide whether to allow NPDES
  regulated entities to override these pre-populated data.
(2) The data elements in this table conform to EPA's policy regarding the application requirements for renewal
  or reissuance of NPDES permits for discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems (see 61 FR 41698; 6
  August 1996).
(3) The data elements in this table are also supported by the Office Management and Budget approved permit
  applications and forms for the NPDES program.
(4) These data will allow EPA and the NPDES program authority to link facilities, compliance monitoring
  activities, compliance determinations, and enforcement actions. For example, these data will provide several
  ways to make the following linkages: linking violations to enforcement actions and final orders; linking
  single event violations and compliance monitoring activities; linking program reports to DMRs; linking program
  reports to compliance monitoring activities; and linking enforcement activities and compliance monitoring
  activities.

PART 403--GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR EXISTING AND NEW
SOURCES OF POLLUTION

0
17. The authority citation for part 403 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

0
18. In Sec.  403.12, revise paragraphs (e)(1), (h), and (i) to read as
follows:

Sec.  403.12   Reporting requirements for POTW's and industrial users.

* * * * *
    (e) * * * (1) Any Industrial User subject to a categorical
Pretreatment Standard (except a Non-Significant Categorical User as
defined in Sec.  403.3(v)(2)), after the compliance date of such
Pretreatment Standard, or, in the case of a New Source, after
commencement of the discharge into the POTW, shall submit to the
Control Authority during the months of June and December, unless
required more frequently in the Pretreatment Standard or by the Control
Authority or the Approval Authority, a report indicating the nature and
concentration of pollutants in the effluent which are limited by such
categorical Pretreatment Standards. In addition, this report shall
include a record of measured or estimated average and maximum daily
flows for the reporting period for the Discharge reported in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section except that the Control Authority may require
more detailed reporting of flows. In cases where the Pretreatment
Standard requires compliance with a Best Management Practice (or
pollution prevention alternative), the User shall submit documentation
required by the Control Authority or the Pretreatment Standard
necessary to determine the compliance status of the User. At the
discretion of the Control Authority and in consideration of such
factors as local high or low flow rates, holidays, budget cycles, etc.,
the Control Authority may modify the months during which the above
reports are to be submitted. For Industrial Users for which EPA or the
authorized state, tribe, or territory is the Control Authority, as of
December 21, 2023 or an EPA-approved alternative date (see 40 CFR
127.24(e) or (f)), all reports submitted in compliance with this
section must be submitted electronically by the industrial user to the
Control Authority or initial recipient, as defined in 40 CFR 127.2(b),
in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all
cases, subpart D to part 3), 40 CFR 122.22, and 40 CFR part 127. 40 CFR
part 127 is not intended to undo existing requirements for electronic
reporting. Prior to this date, and independent of 40 CFR part 127, the
Industrial Users for which EPA or the authorized state, tribe, or
territory is the Control Authority may be required to report
electronically if specified by a particular control mechanism or if
required to do so by state law.
* * * * *
    (h) Reporting requirements for Industrial Users not subject to
categorical Pretreatment Standards. The Control Authority must require
appropriate reporting from those Industrial Users with Discharges that
are not subject to categorical Pretreatment Standards. Significant Non-
categorical Industrial Users must submit to the Control Authority at
least once every six months (on dates specified by the Control
Authority) a description of the nature, concentration, and flow of the
pollutants required to be reported by the Control Authority. In cases
where a local limit requires compliance with a Best Management Practice
or pollution prevention alternative, the User must submit documentation
required by the Control Authority to determine the compliance status of
the User. These reports must be based on sampling and analysis
performed in the period covered by the report, and in accordance with
the techniques described in 40 CFR part 136 of this chapter and
amendments thereto. This sampling and analysis may be performed by the
Control Authority in lieu of the significant non-categorical Industrial
User. For Industrial Users for which EPA or the authorized state,
tribe, or territory is the Control Authority, as of December 21, 2023
or an EPA-approved alternative date (see 40 CFR

127.24(e) or (f)), all reports submitted in compliance with this
section must be submitted electronically by the industrial user to the
Control Authority or initial recipient, as defined in 40 CFR 127.2(b),
in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all
cases, subpart D to part 3), 40 CFR 122.22, and 40 CFR part 127. 40 CFR
part 127 is not intended to undo existing requirements for electronic
reporting. Prior to this date, and independent of 40 CFR part 127, the
Industrial Users for which EPA or the authorized state, tribe, or
territory is the Control Authority may be required to report
electronically if specified by a particular control mechanism or if
required to do so by state law.
    (i) Annual POTW reports. POTWs with approved Pretreatment Programs
shall provide the Approval Authority with a report that briefly
describes the POTW's program activities, including activities of all
participating agencies, if more than one jurisdiction is involved in
the local program. The report required by this section shall be
submitted no later than one year after approval of the POTW's
Pretreatment Program, and at least annually thereafter, and must
include, at a minimum, the applicable required data in appendix A to 40
CFR part 127. The report required by this section must also include a
summary of changes to the POTW's pretreatment program that have not
been previously reported to the Approval Authority and any other
relevant information requested by the Approval Authority. As of
December 21, 2023 or an EPA-approved alternative date (see 40 CFR
127.24(e) or (f)), all annual reports submitted in compliance with this
section must be submitted electronically by the POTW Pretreatment
Program to the Approval Authority or initial recipient, as defined in
40 CFR 127.2(b), in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3
(including, in all cases, subpart D to 40 CFR part 3), 40 CFR 122.22,
and 40 CFR part 127. 40 CFR part 127 is not intended to undo existing
requirements for electronic reporting. Prior to this date, and
independent of 40 CFR part 127, the Approval Authority may also require
POTW Pretreatment Programs to electronically submit annual reports
under this section if specified by a particular permit or if required
to do so by state law.
* * * * *

PART 503--STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE

0
19. The authority citation for part 503 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Sections 405(d) and (e) of the Clean Water Act, as
amended by Pub. L. 95-217, sec. 54(d), 91 Stat. 1591 (33 U.S.C.
1345(d) and (e)); and Pub. L. 100-4, title IV, sec. 406(a), (b), 101
Stat., 71, 72 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).

0
20. Revise Sec.  503.18 to read as follows:

Sec.  503.18   Reporting.

    Class I sludge management facilities, POTWs (as defined in Sec.
501.2 of this chapter) with a design flow rate equal to or greater than
one million gallons per day, and POTWs that serve 10,000 people or more
shall submit a report on February 19 of each year. As of December 21,
2016, all reports submitted in compliance with this section must be
submitted electronically by the operator to EPA when the Regional
Administrator is the Director in compliance with this section and 40
CFR part 3 (including, in all cases, subpart D to part 3), 40 CFR
122.22, and 40 CFR part 127. As of December 21, 2023, or an EPA-
approved alternative date (see 40 CFR 127.24(e) or (f)), all reports
submitted in compliance with this section must be submitted
electronically in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3
(including, in all cases, subpart D to 40 CFR part 3), 40 CFR 122.22,
and 40 CFR part 127. 40 CFR part 127 is not intended to undo existing
requirements for electronic reporting. Prior to the compliance
deadlines for electronic reporting (see Table 1 in 40 CFR 127.16), the
Director may also require operators to electronically submit annual
reports under this section if required to do so by state law.
    (a) The information in Sec.  503.17(a), except the information in
Sec.  503.17 (a)(3)(ii), (a)(4)(ii) and in (a)(5)(ii), for the
appropriate requirements on February 19 of each year.
    (b) The information in Sec.  503.17(a)(5)(ii)(A) through
(a)(5)(ii)(G) on February 19th of each year when 90 percent or more of
any of the cumulative pollutant loading rates in Table 2 of Sec.
503.13 is reached at a land application site.
0
21. Revise Sec.  503.28 to read as follows:

Sec.  503.28   Reporting.

    Class I sludge management facilities, POTWs (as defined in 40 CFR
501.2) with a design flow rate equal to or greater than one million
gallons per day, and POTWs that serve 10,000 people or more shall
submit a report on February 19 of each year. As of December 21, 2016,
all reports submitted in compliance with this section must be submitted
electronically by the operator to EPA when the Regional Administrator
is the Director in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3
(including, in all cases, subpart D to 40 CFR part 3), 40 CFR 122.22,
and 40 CFR part 127. As of December 21, 2023, or an EPA-approved
alternative date (see 40 CFR 127.24(e) or (f)), all reports submitted
in compliance with this section must be submitted electronically in
compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all
cases, subpart D to 40 CFR part 3), 40 CFR 122.22, and 40 CFR part 127.
40 CFR part 127 is not intended to undo existing requirements for
electronic reporting. Prior to the compliance deadlines for electronic
reporting (see Table 1 in 40 CFR 127.16), the Director may also require
operators to electronically submit annual reports under this section if
required to do so by state law.
0
22. Revise Sec.  503.48 to read as follows:

Sec.  503.48   Reporting.

    Class I sludge management facilities, POTWs (as defined in Sec.
501.2 of this chapter) with a design flow rate equal to or greater than
one million gallons per day, and POTWs that serve a population of
10,000 people or greater shall submit a report on February 19 of each
year. As of December 21, 2016, all reports submitted in compliance with
this section must be submitted electronically by the operator to EPA
when the Regional Administrator is the Director in compliance with this
section and 40 CFR part 3 (including, in all cases, subpart D to 40 CFR
part 3), 40 CFR 122.22, and 40 CFR part 127. As of December 21, 2023,
or an EPA-approved alternative date (see 40 CFR 127.24(e) or (f)), all
reports submitted in compliance with this section must be submitted
electronically in compliance with this section and 40 CFR part 3
(including, in all cases, subpart D to part 3), 40 CFR 122.22, and 40
CFR part 127. 40 CFR part 127 is not intended to undo existing
requirements for electronic reporting. Prior to the compliance
deadlines for electronic reporting (see Table 1 in 40 CFR 127.16), the
Director may also require operators to electronically submit annual
reports under this section if required to do so by state law.

[FR Doc. 2020-02889 Filed 2-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 225)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 70271-70272]
[DOCID:fr20no08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0454; Airspace Docket No. 08-AAL-13]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Napakiak, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Napakiak, AK to
provide adequate controlled airspace to contain aircraft executing
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs). Two SIAPs are being
developed for the Napakiak Airport. This action establishes Class E
airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at
Napakiak Airport, Napakiak, AK.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, January 15, 2009. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, AAL-538G, Federal Aviation
Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587;
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet address: http://www.faa.gov/about/
office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/
alaskan/rulemaking/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On Thursday September 18, 2008, the FAA proposed to amend part 71
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class
E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft.
above the surface at Napakiak, AK (73 FR 54092). The action was
proposed in order to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to
contain aircraft while executing instrument procedures for the Napakiak
Airport. Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. and
1,200 ft. above the surface in the Napakiak Airport area is created by
this action.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA.
No comments were received. The rule is adopted as proposed.
    The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot
reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North
American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200
ft. transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed October 3,
2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in
this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 establishes Class E airspace at
the Napakiak Airport, Alaska. This Class E airspace is created to
accommodate aircraft executing new instrument procedures, and will be
depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The intended
effect of this rule is to provide adequate controlled airspace for

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the Napakiak Airport,
Napakiak, Alaska.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of
airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because
it creates Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft
executing instrument procedures for the Napakiak Airport and represents
the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable
airspace.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending Upward From 700 Feet or
More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Napakiak, AK [New]

Napakiak, Napakiak Airport, AK
    (Lat. 62[deg]41'25'' N., long. 161[deg]58'43'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of the Napakiak Airport, AK; and that
airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a
84-mile radius of the Napakiak Airport, AK.
* * * * *

    Issued in Anchorage, AK, November 7, 2008.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group.
 [FR Doc. E8-27547 Filed 11-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 24385]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11198]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2018-45]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, this aspect of the FAA's regulatory activities.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before June 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0339
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Forseth, AIR-673, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 S. 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-6547,
email [email protected], phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Alphonso
Pendergrass, ARM-200, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, email
[email protected], phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Renton, Washington.
Victor Wicklund,
Manager, Transport Standards Branch.

Petition For Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-0339.
    Petitioner: Airbus SAS.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  25.807(g)(7).
    Description of Relief Sought: Allow more than the regulatory
combined maximum number of 70 passenger seats for all Type III exits
when the mid-cabin door (Door 3) is de-rated to a Type III exit.

[FR Doc. 2018-11198 Filed 5-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P