[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-9109]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 19, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1903

[Docket No. C-03]

 

Abatement Verification

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA is developing a regulation requiring employers to certify 
abatement and submit abatement plans and progress reports as a result 
of OSHA citations. In addition, OSHA is proposing the placement of a 
tag on cited equipment to alert affected employees that a hazardous 
condition exists while abatement is being accomplished. Violation of 
the regulation would result in civil penalties as prescribed by section 
17 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. This notice 
invites interested parties to submit comments and recommendations on 
the issues detailed in this document, as well as other pertinent 
issues. All the information received in response to this notice will be 
carefully reviewed. The comments received will assist OSHA in 
developing the final regulation.

DATES: Written comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking must be 
postmarked no later than July 18, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments and information should be submitted in 
quadruplicate to the Docket Officer, Docket No. C-03, Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration, room N-2625, U.S. Department of 
Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: 
(202) 219-7894.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. James Foster, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Office 
of Public Affairs, room N-3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 219-8151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this proposed rule is to 
require employers to inform OSHA and their employees about measures 
they will take or have taken in response to OSHA citations, as well as 
to inform employees about OSHA citations and the alleged safety or 
health hazards described therein.

I. Background

    Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (i.e., ``the 
Act'' or ``the OSH Act''), 29 U.S.C. 651 et. seq., OSHA inspects 
workplaces to determine whether employers are complying with OSHA 
standards and other statutory or regulatory requirements. If OSHA 
believes that an employer has committed a violation, a citation is 
issued. The citation will reference the requirement allegedly violated, 
the alleged violation, and note the proposed penalty and a date by 
which the violation is to be corrected, i.e., the abatement date. 
Section 9(a), 29 U.S.C. 658(a).
    Currently, the cover letter to the employer which accompanies an 
OSHA citation states that the employer must notify the Area Director 
promptly by letter of abatement of violations. (OSHA Instruction ADM 1-
1.12A CH-7, August 3, 1987. ``IMIS FORMS Manual'', Appendix C, page C-
22). No specific regulation, however, authorizes this notification 
action. When, therefore, an employer does not provide written 
verification of abatement, OSHA may, depending on the circumstances, 
seek to verify abatement by making further efforts to communicate with 
the employer (e.g., by telephone), or by conducting an on-site follow-
up inspection.
    On May 1991, the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report to 
Congress in which it assessed the adequacy of OSHA's policies and 
procedures for determining whether hazards have been abated. The report 
(GAO/HRD-91-35) (Ex. 1)\1\ found that these policies and procedures 
have limitations that impede the Agency's ability to detect employers 
who have failed to abate the safety and health hazards for which they 
have been cited. GAO found that OSHA's policies: (1) Do not require, 
but merely request, employers to provide evidence of abatement, and (2) 
inadequately address confirmation of hazard abatements found at 
construction worksites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\``Ex.,'' followed by a number, designate the exhibit in the 
docket containing the referenced document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The GAO report concluded that OSHA would obtain improved evidence 
of abatement if its regulations required employers to provide specific 
documentation that they have abated hazards. The report further 
concluded that such a requirement would enhance OSHA's ability to 
detect noncomplying employers and determine where to conduct follow-up 
inspections. Employers also would be more likely to abate hazards 
because they would have to provide specific evidence of abatement. 
Accordingly, GAO recommended that OSHA promulgate a regulation 
requiring employers to submit detailed evidence of what corrective 
actions have been taken to abate hazards.
    GAO was also concerned about hazard abatement problems in the 
construction industry due to the mobility of hazardous equipment. The 
report's conclusion stated:

    OSHA needs to confirm abatement of construction hazards in such 
a way that they will not be repeated at subsequent worksites. OSHA's 
practice of accepting worksite closing as a form of abatement allows 
the continuation of procedures and practices that perpetuate 
hazardous conditions. Consequently, contractors can continue to use 
a defective piece of equipment, untrained employees, or inadequate 
procedures and processes at subsequent worksites. OSHA should 
require contractors to take abatement actions that will correct what 
caused the hazard rather than just eliminate the hazard at the 
inspection site. (emphasis added) (GAO/HRD-91-35)

    The second GAO recommendation was for OSHA to revise its polices so 
that (1) citations to employers at construction worksites require 
correcting the condition, equipment, or procedure that create the 
hazard, and (2) employers will not be able to ``abate'' hazards solely 
by moving to another location.
    Although not referenced in the GAO report, unsuspecting employees 
may be exposed to similar hazards under conditions in which the place 
of employment and equipment are permanent, but there is a frequent 
turnover of employees in temporary jobs or employees are rotated 
frequently through different job assignments. Also, workers in mobile 
crews who visit different job sites should have available hazard 
warning information regarding defective equipment which they must 
operate.
    Current OSHA policy is that written, detailed plans of abatement 
shall be submitted to the Area Director when citations are issued 
alleging (i.e. noise or air contaminant) violations and OSHA orders 
that engineering or administrative controls be implemented. In these 
cases, employers are also asked to submit progress reports, generally 
every ninety days, detailing steps taken to achieve complete abatement 
(e.g., procurement of engineering controls). Field Operations Manual, 
chapter V (appendix), E.4.a. and c., E.5.a. and c. (Ex. 2) OSHA's 
policy, therefore is to have employers verify that the violation cited 
has been corrected. Despite this policy, there is no existing 
regulation, enforceable by citations and civil penalties, which 
mandates employers to submit abatement plans, progress reports, or 
abatement verification letters. Thus, OSHA proposes that employers 
should be required by regulation to submit such documents.
    Currently, 29 CFR 1903.16 requires the posting of a citation at or 
near the place of the alleged violation. This regulation is inadequate 
in many instances to notify employees that OSHA has required the 
abatement of hazardous conditions because citations are often posted on 
company bulletin boards that employees may not see or read. Employees 
are more likely, therefore, to be informed about hazardous equipment 
they are operating via a required tag affixed to that equipment than by 
a posted citation. OSHA already requires that employers in general 
industry and construction affix accident-prevention tags informing 
employees about hazardous conditions. 29 CFR 1910.145(f) and 
1926.200(h). However, these standards do not require employers to state 
that a condition has been cited. Further, the General Industry standard 
does not apply to construction, maritime, or agricultural employers. 29 
CFR 1910.145 (f)(1)(ii). Therefore, OSHA also proposes that all 
employers covered by the OSH Act be required to affix tags to cited 
equipment informing employees about an OSHA citation regarding that 
equipment.

Legal Considerations

Introduction

    For purposes of the proposed rule, there are two key terms, i.e., 
``abatement date'' and ``final order.'' The following discussion is 
provided in order to relate these terms to the statutory framework 
created by the OSH Act. The discussion, however, is general in nature 
and is not intended to address every situation that may arise in the 
course of litigation.

Contesting a Citation

    As noted above, an employer has the right, under the OSH Act, to 
contest a citation or a prescribed abatement date. (employers may also 
contest only the amount of the penalty proposed for a violation, but 
this action does not delay the abatement period prescribed for that 
violation). An abatement date can also be contested by an affected 
employee or a representative of affected employees. If neither the 
employer nor employees contest the citation, the date set forth in the 
citation for the correction of the violation is the abatement date.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\The Act provides that an employer may file a notice of 
contest within fifteen working days of receiving the notification of 
proposed penalty. Section 10, 29 U.S.C. 659. (Under current OSHA 
practice, the notification of proposed penalty is attached to the 
citation.) Appellate courts have held that OSHA may set an abatement 
date which falls within the fifteen-day period, in which case the 
period allowed for contest is shortened accordingly. See Dunlop v. 
Haybuster Mfg. Co., 524 F.2d 222 (8th Cir. 1975); Brennan v. OSHRC 
and Kesler & Sons Construction Company, 513 F.2d 553, 557-58 (10th 
Cir. 1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Act also provides that, in the event of a contest, the 
employer's obligation to abate a cited violation is suspended, provided 
that the employer's contest has been made ``* * * in good faith and not 
solely for purposes of delay or avoidance of penalties.'' Section 
10(b), 29 U.S.C. 659(b). Once a citation is contested, an employer's 
abatement obligation generally does not start to run until a ``final 
order'' has been issued ending the administrative phase of the 
litigation.
    When a citation or a prescribed abatement period has been 
contested, the matter is adjudicated by the Occupational Safety and 
Health Review Commission (i.e., ``the Commission''), an independent 
agency headed by three Presidential appointees (i.e., ``Members''). 
Initially, a contested case is usually heard by an administrative law 
judge (ALJ) of the Commission. The ALJ issues a decision and order, 
which are then docketed with the Commission. This decision and order 
may subsequently be reviewed by the full Commission. Section 12(j), 29 
U.S.C. 659(j). Under this review procedure, any Member of the 
Commission may direct review of the ALJ's decision and order within 
thirty days of the docketing date. If there is no direction for review, 
the ALJ's decision and order becomes the final order of the Commission. 
Id. Any abatement requirement affirmed or modified by an ALJ's decision 
and order will start to run on the date that the ALJ's decision and 
order become a final order. The new abatement date is determined by 
adding to the final order date either: (1) The number of days allowed 
originally for abatement in the citation (in cases where the ALJ 
affirms the abatement requirement) or (2) the newly specified period 
for abatement (in cases where the ALJ modifies the abatement 
requirement). If, However, the Commission reviews an ALJ's decision and 
order, the employer's abatement obligation remains suspended during the 
review process. Following its review, the Commission will generally 
issue its own decision, which becomes a final order thirty days after 
its decision is issued. Section 10(c), 29 U.S.C. 659(c).\3\ Again, any 
abatement period affirmed or modified as a result of the Commission's 
decision will start to run from the date its decision becomes a final 
order.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\Prior to issuing its decision, the Commission may sever one 
or more citation items from the case if it determines that it will 
not review the ALJ's affirmance of those items. See Hamilton Die 
Cast Inc., 12 BNA OSRC 1797 (No. 83-308, 1986). The order severing 
citation items will become a final order as to those items.
    \4\It is possible that the Commission (or an ALJ) could, in 
modifying an abatement requirement, state an actual date by which 
abatement must be accomplished. In that situation, the abatement 
date would be the date as specified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An ALJ's decision and order that have not been directed for 
Commission review, or a decision of the Commission following such 
review, also may be challenged in the appropriate federal appellate 
court. Sections 11(a) and (b), 29 U.S.C. 660(a) and (b). Filing a 
petition for appellate court review does not automatically stay the 
employer's abatement requirements. Id. In extraordinary cases, however, 
either the Commission or the court of appeals may stay the final order 
at the employer's request. If stayed, the abatement requirement does 
not begin to run until the appellate court upholds the earlier decision 
of the Commission or the ALJ (i.e., to affirms or revise the abatement 
requirement) by issuing a mandate or an equivalent order giving legal 
effect to the appellate court's decision. Where a citation was vacated 
by the Commission or the ALJ, and the appellate court subsequently 
reverses that decision, the appellate court will generally remand the 
case to the Commission for entry of an order to affirm the citation. 
The abatement requirement then will begin to run thirty days after the 
date of the appellate court's order. Should the appellate court, in 
such cases, not remand the case for entry of a Commission order, the 
abatement obligation begins to run from the court's own entry of 
mandate or equivalent order.
    Settlement or withdrawal of a contest. At any stage of an ongoing 
contest proceeding, there may be a settlement of the case, in whole or 
in part, or the employer may unilaterally withdraw the notice of 
contest, in whole or in part. Under these conditions, the ALJ or the 
Commission will enter an order based on the settlement or withdrawal of 
the notice of contest. It is OSHA's legal position that, in some 
circumstances, withdrawal or settlement actions by employers become 
final orders by operation of law upon execution, without approval by 
the Commission. (See Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co. v. United Transportation 
Union, 474 U.S. 3 (1985)). However, for purposes of determining the 
timing of an employer's abatement obligations under the proposed 
regulation, OSHA has elected to treat orders based on settlement or 
withdrawal in the same manner as other ALJ and Commission orders, i.e., 
the abatement obligation begins to run thirty days after the docketing 
of the ALJ order by the Commission or after the issuance of the 
Commission order, as the case may be. Should the parties phrase the 
settlement agreement such that abatement is called for by a date 
certain, or that the abatement period will run from a certain event 
(e.g., the date of execution of the agreement), the abatement date will 
be determined in accordance with the terms of the agreement provided no 
employee or employee representative contests the abatement period 
specified in the agreement.
    The existence of a Commission final order has a number of 
consequences for enforcement. If OSHA determines that an employer has 
failed to correct a violation on or before the expiration of the 
abatement date, OSHA may issue a notification of failure to abate. 
Section 10(b), 29 U.S.C. 659(b). A penalty of up to $7000 may be 
assessed for each day the failure to abate continues. Section 17(d), 29 
U.S.C. 666(d). If, after a final order, the employer commits a 
substantially similar violation in a different location, or with a 
different piece of equipment, or with the same piece of equipment after 
a period of temporary abatement, the violation is classified as 
repeated and a penalty of up to $70,000 may be assessed. Section 17 
(a), 29 U.S.C. 666(a). Further, the Secretary may file a petition for 
enforcement of a Commission order which has became final after a notice 
of contest, or after a failure to contest within fifteen working days. 
This petition is filed in the court of appeals and the court issues a 
decree enforcing the Commission final order. If the employer violates 
this decree, the employer may be subject to penalties for contempt of 
court. Section 11(b), 29 U.S.C. 660(b).
    The discussion above details the regular procedures for obtaining 
and enforcing final Commission orders with their concomitant abatement 
dates. In addition, there are procedures for modifying the abatement 
requirements of a citation due to employer hardship. Upon a showing by 
an employer of inability to complete abatement within the prescribed 
period because of factors beyond the employer's reasonable control, the 
employer may obtain a modification of the abatement date. Section 
10(c), 29 U.S.C. 659(c). A petition for modification of abatement date 
(PMA) must be filed no later than the close of the next working day 
following the date on which abatement is required. If neither OSHA nor 
affected employees object to the employer's request, OSHA may approve 
the PMA and it then becomes a final order pursuant to section 10(a) and 
(c) of the Act. If either OSHA or employees object to the PMA, the case 
is forwarded to the Commission for adjudication. See 29 CFR 2200.37. 
The Commission may either accept, reject, or modify the employer's 
request for additional time and issue an appropriate order.

II. Summary and Explanation of the Regulation

    Under the proposed regulation, an employer who has received an OSHA 
citation must submit to the OSHA Area Director an abatement 
certificate, which states whether or not the violation has been abated, 
as documentation of abatement. The proposed regulation would also 
require an employer who has received an OSHA citation to submit an 
abatement plan, where the Area Director requests one by such means as a 
note on the citation, which sets forth a schedule for the 
implementation of abatement measures. Under the proposal the employer 
would also submit progress reports, which explain what measures have 
been taken, if any, in the process of achieving abatement, when the 
Area Director requires them. The proposed rule would also require 
employers to affix tags on equipment noting that a citation has been 
issued.

Paragraph (a), Scope and Application

    This regulation applies to all industries covered by the OSH Act, 
including general industry, construction, maritime, and agricultural 
employers. The specific identification of the major industrial groups, 
in this section, is intended to make this fact clear.

Paragraph (b), Definitions

    Only those terms of the definitions paragraph which were felt to 
need further clarification are included in this section.
    Abatement date. The date by which the employer must abate a 
violation depends on the stage to which a case has progressed. This 
definition sets forth the various ways an abatement date is determined. 
Circumstance (1) refers to the date actually set forth in the citation, 
where the citation item has not been contested. As explained in Section 
I, this date applies even if it is with the fifteen-working-day period 
normally available for the filing of a notice of contest.
    Circumstance (2) is self-explanatory, as it refers simply to adding 
to the final order date either the amount of time in days initially 
specified for abatement on the citation or, if that period was modified 
by the Commission or its judge, the amount of time so modified.
    Circumstance (3) refers to a date for abatement ``expressly set 
forth'' by the Commission, or a Commission administrative law judge. 
The phrase ``expressly set forth'' refers to a date certain or to a set 
number of days from the final order date specified date.
    Circumstance (4) refers to a date set in a PMA final order. The 
term (PMA) refers to a petition for modification of the abatement date 
described in Section 10(c) of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. 659(c). A PMA 
final order results either from OSHA's approval of an uncontested PMA 
or the Commission's approval, modification or rejection of the 
employer's request for additional time in order to complete abatement.
    Circumstance (5) refers to settlement agreements signed by OSHA and 
the employer, and, in some cases, employees or their authorized 
representatives. As in circumstance(3) the phrase ``expressly set 
forth'' refers to a date certain or to a set number of days from the 
final order date or other specified date.
    Abatement plan. As the definition implies with its reference to 
``outlining a schedule for the implementation of measures to achieve 
abatement'', an abatement plan required by a citation will specify the 
requirement for and the frequency of ``progress reports.'' Generally, 
abatement plans and progress reports will be associated with multi-step 
or long-term abatement.
    Citation item. A citation item is a single instance of a violation. 
For example, a citation may contain ``Item 1'', alleging that the 
employer has one machine in violation of 29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1) because 
it was not guarded. A citation may also list several violations of the 
same standard under the same citation item, for example ``Item 1, 
instance a'', and ``Item 1, instance b''. ``Item 1, Instance a'', and 
``Item 1, Instance b'', etc. are all separate ``citation items'' within 
the meaning of the proposed regulation. Final order date: The date a 
citation becomes a final order is the date on which a citation becomes 
effective. The major ways a citation can become a final order are 
detailed in the definition.
    The first category is that of an uncontested citation. If there is 
no contest by either the employer or the employees, the citation 
becomes a final order automatically, fifteen (15) working days after 
the date the employer receives the citation and proposed penalty, 
pursuant to Section 10 of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. 659.
    The second category refers to situations in which there has been a 
contest either by the employer or by employees, resulting in the 
issuance of a decision or order by an ALJ. Under Section 12(j) of the 
OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 661(j), a decision of an ALJ becomes a final 
order of the Commission thirty days ``after such report'' if no member 
of the Commission directs review of the case. Section 12(j) has been 
construed by the Commission to mean that the thirty-day period runs 
from the date on which the decision of the ALJ is docketed by the 
Commission. (See 29 CFR 2200.90(b)(2); Robert W. Setterlin & Sons Co., 
4 BNA OSHC 1214 (No. 7377, 1976)).
    The third category refers to decisions issued by the Members of the 
Commission, including orders severing items from a case. Pursuant to 
Section 10(c) of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 659(c), such decisions 
become final orders thirty days after their issuance, and the filing of 
petitions for review of these decisions in a court of appeals does not 
stay the employer's abatement obligation unless a stay has been 
expressly ordered.
    The fourth category addresses the two situations in which the start 
of an employer's abatement obligation depends on action by a court. In 
those cases in which a court of appeals stays an abatement requirement, 
the abatement requirement starts when the court issues its mandate or 
an equivalent order following a decision of the court upholding the 
Commission's affirmance of the citation. In those cases where the 
Commission did not affirm a citation but the court reverses that 
decision, the abatement obligation starts upon the court's issuance of 
its mandate or equivalent order unless the court remands the case to 
the Commission for the issuance of an appropriate Commission order. In 
that situation, the abatement period starts when the Commission's order 
becomes final thirty days after its issuance.
    PMA final order. This is the order approving, modifying or 
rejecting the employer's request for additional time to complete the 
abatement requirements of the citation.

Paragraph (c), Abatement Certificate

    Paragraph (c)(1) specifies the minimum content of the abatement 
certificate; (c)(2) provides special procedures for reissuing an 
abatement certificate for those situations where abatement was not 
initially completed; and (c)(3) allows an employer to combine the 
individual certifications of hazard abatement into one certificate.
    Paragraph (c)(4) of the proposed regulation requires the abatement 
certificate to be accompanied by ``documentary evidence.'' OSH 
envisions ``documentary evidence'' to be any type of document which 
provides evidence that a violative condition which was cited has, in 
fact, been abated. The examples of documentary evidence which follow 
are provided in order to clarify OSHA's intent and are not to be 
considered as the only methods which would be acceptable to the Agency, 
nor are they automatically accepted in all cases: (1) An invoice or 
receipt for purchase or disposal of goods and services; (2) analyses or 
reports from industrial hygienists, engineers, or other experts 
indicating the methods by which the extent to which the hazardous 
condition has been abated; (3) a manufacturer's recertification for 
repaired equipment; (4) contracts and specifications for services; (5) 
training records, programs, and attendance sheets; (6) in-house 
certification; (7) photographic prints depicting the abated condition 
which have been labeled appropriately with the citation and item 
references as they appeared on the citation; and (8) videotape with 
concise audio and/or visual identification for the citation reference.

Paragraph (d), Abatement Plan

    Paragraph (d) of the proposed regulation refers to written 
abatement plans. OSHA currently requests employers to submit abatement 
plans when the Area Director finds them appropriate in connection with 
safety or health violations. The proposed regulation would give the 
Area Director discretion to require abatement plans with respect to 
either safety or health violations.

Paragraph (e), Progress Reports

    Paragraph (e) of the proposal refers to written progress reports. 
OSHA policy currently provides for progress reports whenever the Area 
Director requests them in connection with safety or health violations 
requiring multi-step or long term abatement. The proposed regulation 
would make such progress reports mandatory when required by the Area 
Director and indicated on the citation.

Paragraph (f), Tagging of Cited Equipment

    Paragraph (f) of the proposed regulation requires the placement of 
a tag on cited equipment in order to alert employees who might be 
exposed to the hazards of that equipment. The tag will state that this 
equipment has been cited. This procedure will address the situation, 
common to the construction industry, in which cited equipment is 
removed from one worksite to another where employees are not aware of 
the hazardous condition. The tag requirements found in this proposed 
regulation are intended to provide such employees with knowledge of the 
violative condition of the equipment. The proposal provides that these 
warning tags shall comply with the current OSHA requirements for 
accident prevention tags (i.e. use, signal word, and general tag 
criteria) found in Sec. 1910.145(f).
    The proposed regulation would require the tag to remain in place on 
the equipment until the defect has been remedied. If the equipment is 
removed from the workplace, sold, or otherwise transferred, it is 
OSHA's intent that the tag remain on the equipment. Mere lack of 
employee exposure to the equipment will not allow the employer to 
remove the tag.
    The reference to ``tagging equipment'' does not require the tagging 
of supplies, furnishings, policies, procedures or building service 
distribution systems such as for water. However, individual component 
parts within a distribution system may be subject to tagging. For 
example, an unguarded drive shaft on a circulating pump in a water 
distribution system found in violation of the machine guarding standard 
would be considered equipment within the meaning of the regulation and 
thus require tagging.

Paragraph (g), Transmittal of Documents

    OSHA has included the following note in paragraph (g).

    Note: Receipt of an employer's documents by the Agency under 
this regulation does not constitute an agreement that the employer 
is in compliance.

    There are three reasons for this provision. First, although the 
Agency will try to evaluate submitted material in a timely fashion, 
other agency priorities may delay such action. Second, in some cases, 
the submitted materials may not accurately or completely describe the 
abatement. Third, changing working conditions may make the abatement 
action described in the materials submitted inaccurate or inadequate.

Paragraph (i), Posting Requirements

    Paragraph (i)(5) of the proposed regulation states that the final 
abatement certificate must remain posted until abatement has been 
completed or for six calendar days, whichever is later. Thus, if 
abatement has been completed, the certificate shall remain posted for 
at least six days after completion. If abatement has not been 
completed, the abatement certificate initially submitted shall remain 
posted until the violation has been abated. When abatement has been 
accomplished, the new final abatement certificate shall remain posted 
for six days. If a final abatement certificate deals with a number of 
citation items, it shall remain posted for as long as it takes to 
comply with the posting requirements for all of the items. OSHA 
believes that the posting of the abatement certificate will inform 
employees whether or not the hazard has been abated and also help to 
assure the accuracy of the certificate.

III. Pertinent Legal Authority

    This proposed regulation is authorized by Sections 8(c)(1), 
8(g)(2), and 9(b) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 
(the Act), 29 U.S.C. 657 and 658. Under Section 8(c)(1) ``[e]ach 
employer shall make, keep and preserve, and make available to the 
Secretary or the Secretary of Health [and Human Services] * * *, such 
records regarding his activities relating to this Act as the Secretary, 
in cooperation with the Secretary of Health [and Human Services] * * *, 
may prescribe by regulation as necessary or appropriate for the 
enforcement of this Act or for developing information regarding the 
causes and prevention of occupational accidents and illnesses.'' 
Section 8(g)(2) empowers the Secretary of labor to ``prescribe such 
rules and regulations as he may deem necessary to carry out [his] 
responsibilities under this Act.'' Moreover, pursuant to Section 
8(c)(1), the Secretary has authority to issue regulations requiring 
employers to keep their employees informed of the employers' 
responsibilities under the Act. Section 9(b) authorizes the Secretary 
to promulgate regulations associated with the posting of citations.
    In addition, the Secretary's responsibilities under the Act are 
defined largely by its enumerated purposes, which include: Providing 
for appropriate reporting procedures that will help achieve the 
objectives of this Act and accurately describe the nature of the 
occupational safety and health problem [29 U.S.C. 651(b)(12)]; 
developing innovative methods, techniques, and approaches for dealing 
with occupational safety and health problems [29 U.S.C. 651(b)(5)]; and 
providing an effective enforcement program [29 U.S.C. 651(b)(10)].
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Secretary asserts 
that the proposed regulation is necessary and appropriate to conduct 
enforcement responsibilities under the Act, to develop information 
about the prevention of occupational accidents and illnesses, and to 
inform employees of their protections and obligations under the Act.

IV. Comments and Information Requested

    Comment is requested on all issues involving the proposed 
regulation. In particular, OSHA requests comment on the following 
questions:
    1. What type of documentary evidence should OSHA require employers 
to submit as proof of final abatement? Should the type of documentation 
required to be submitted as proof of final abatement vary according to 
what is required for abatement, the type of hazard, or the 
classification of violation (i.e., willful, repeat, serious, other-
than-serious, regulatory)? What criteria should OSHA apply in judging 
either the sufficiency or quality of the documentation?
    2. What are the costs (time and money) of complying with this new 
regulation and the basis for estimating these costs?
    3. What will be the effects of the requirement that employers post 
their abatement documents?
    4. How do the proposed abatement verification procedures differ 
from current or previous practices of informing OSHA that abatement has 
been accomplished?
    5. How much time does each employer currently spend on abatement 
verification?
    6. What is the appropriate level of management to sign the 
abatement verification?
    7. What are employer experiences with verifying abatement of cited 
conditions for other Federal and State agencies, especially State 
occupational safety and health agencies?
    8. Given the need for evidence of abatement, should an employer be 
required to submit abatement certification if the employer has actually 
abated the condition during the OSHA inspection?
    9. Should OSHA develop an abatement certification form? If so, what 
information should the form contain?
    10. OSHA is proposing in paragraph (f) the use of a tag to be 
placed on cited equipment to alert affected employees that a hazardous 
condition exists with the equipment. Specific comment is requested on 
this particular issue. What information should the tag contain?

V. References

OSHA Policy Changes Needed to Confirm That Employers Abate Serious 
Hazards (GAO/HRD-91-35, Report to Congressional Requesters, May 
1991).
OSHA Instruction CPL 2.45B--Field Operations Manual (FOM).

VI. Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis for Abatement 
Verification

A. Introductory

    Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735) requires regulatory agencies to 
assess the costs and benefits of intended regulations, to consider the 
possible alternatives, and to select the most cost-effective form of 
regulation. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 
requires the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to 
consider the impact of the regulation on small entities.
    This regulatory impact analysis presents the costs, benefits (cost 
savings), and economic impact of the proposed regulation requiring 
certification of abatement. The impact on small businesses is also 
presented.
    The Agency has preliminarily concluded that this regulation is not 
a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in Executive Order 
12866, Section 3, Paragraph (f).
    The proposed regulation for abatement verification would require 
employers to notify OSHA Area Directors whether or not cited violations 
have been abated. It would require employer to notify OSHA Area 
Directors whether or not cited violations have been abated. It would 
also require employers to offer documentation of abatement plans and 
progress reports for multi-step abatement efforts. Based on a survey of 
OSHA regional offices, OSHA estimates that as many as 70 percent of 
cited employers eventually certify and document their abatement actions 
to some degree at the present time. This regulatory action will 
potentially affect all employers covered by the OSH Act.
    This regulatory action can impose penalties for non-reporting of 
conditions even if they have been abated and can also lead to an 
increase in the penalties that employers face from unabated, violative 
conditions. Failure to verify abatement on a timely basis is an 
additional violation. When abatement is verified by the employer but 
not actually performed, criminal penalties for false statement may 
apply. Increased penalties give employers an incentive both to abate 
and to verify abatement, and to do so in a timely manner. Abatement 
reduces the risk of injury, illness, and death for employees. The 
Agency has not estimated the extent of injuries, illnesses, and deaths 
averted by this regulatory action, because abatement itself is already 
required by the OSH Act.

B. Costs of Compliances

Certifying Abatement
    Federal OSHA and State-plan agencies performed about 127,000 
workplace inspections in 1991, issuing about 413,000 separate 
(upgrouped) violations (Table 1). Less than 1 percent of the violations 
were for failure to abate. About 10 percent of all citations were 
contested.
    There were about 9,000 follow-up inspections by OSHA and State-plan 
agencies in 1991 that resulted in about 4,300 violations, of which 71 
were for failure to abate (Table 2). About 18 percent of all follow-up 
violations were contested.
    The Agency estimates that it will take firms, on average, 15 
minutes to prepare and mail documentation to certify abatement, 
independent of firm size. The Agency estimates that the managers or 
proprietors who prepare the certification of abatement earn a total 
wage of $25 per hour, based on data in the Bureau of Labor Statistics 
news, June 18, 1993.
    A ceiling, or maximum estimate, of the cost to employers for 
verifying abatement, including preparation of abatement certificates 
and submission of documentation, can be calculated by multiplying the 
number of violations with the estimated average time to verify 
abatement (not the time and cost to comply with the OSHA standard 
cited) and with the supervisory wage rate (annual, including benefits), 
or

412,707 violations  x  .25 hours per citation  x  $25/hour=
=$2.6 million annually.

Since a large fraction of employers cited for violations now inform 
OSHA that abatement was performed and sometimes offer documentation, 
the new additional cost to employers from this regulation is probably 
much less than the ceiling estimate of $2.6 million annually. Other 
costs, such as for photocopying, photography, or other documenting 
activity, are believed to be minimal. The cost of tags for cited 
equipment is also minor as both the general industry and construction 
standards already contain accident prevention tagging requirements (See 
1910.145 and 1926.200).
Abatement Plans and Progress Reports
    The proposed regulation allows the Agency's Area Director ``at his 
or her discretion'' to require an abatement plan and progress reports 
when multi-step abatement is ``deemed appropriate.'' At the current 
time, when the Area Director issues a citation to an employer (usually 
involving air contaminants, noise, or ergonomics) which will require a 
long, or multi-step, abatement effort, the citation letter lists both 
the steps to be taken and a schedule for completion. The Agency in its 
citation letter informs the employer that it must send progress reports 
to the Area Director.
    Since the employer will have in hand OSHA's proposed plan for 
multi-step abatement to use as a guide, the Agency estimates that it 
will take an employer two hours to write the plan as required by the 
proposed regulation. The Agency estimates that, on average, there are 
three steps in a multi-step abatement and that it will take the 
employer 30 minutes to prepare each progress report. The Agency 
estimates that the total wage rate of a supervisor, manager, or 
proprietor who would perform this work is $25 per hour (Bureau of Labor 
Statistics News, June 18, 1993).
    Currently, citations requiring multi-stage abatement efforts are a 
small percentage of all citations. Virtually all of the multi-stage 
abatements for Federal violations are for three causes: Ergonomics, 
noise, and permissible air limits. In 1991 there were 749 Federal OSHA 
inspections that resulted in citations for ergonomics, air 
contaminants, noise, or single-substance OSHA standards, resulting in 
1,934 violations (all of which would have required multiple step 
abatement). Based on this number of multi-stage abatements required in 
Fiscal year 1991, and assuming that State-plan agencies had an equal 
number, the Agency estimates that the cost of proposing multi-step 
abatement plans and providing progress reports is:

Cost = (1934  x  2)  x  $25/hr  x  [2 hours + (3  x  \1/2\ hours)] = 
$338,450.

C. Benefits (Cost Savings)

Verification Efforts
    This regulatory action will reduce time-consuming efforts required 
of OSHA's enforcement officers to verify and document abatement in 
order to close files, thereby increasing the time available for 
inspection activities. OSHA's Directorate of Compliance Programs 
estimates that these efforts consume approximately 5 percent of 
compliance staff time, or the equivalent of 50 full-time compliance 
officers for Federal enforcement. The Agency estimates that an equal 
number of full-time equivalents perform this task for State-plan 
agencies, or a total of 100 full-time-equivalents. With an average 
estimated salary of $50,000 including benefits, the dollar value of 
this time is approximately $5 million annually. The Agency estimates 
that the increased work of collecting and analyzing abatement 
certificates and accompanying documentation for enforcement agencies 
will be minor--OSHA is currently receiving abatement information for 
approximately 70 percent of its citations. The Agency estimates that 
affected employers should also save approximately the same amount of 
time and money ($5 million annually) spent in responding to OSHA's 
letters and calls seeking verification of abatement.
Follow-Up Inspections
    In FY 1991, Federal OSHA performed about 2,000 follow-up 
inspections, and State-plan agencies about 7,000 (Table 2), for a total 
of about 9,000 annually. Combined, these efforts represented 100,700 
staff hours,\5\ or approximately 50 full-time compliance officers. One 
of the Agency's goals in promulgating this regulation is to reduce the 
resources employed in follow-up inspections as well as other 
unproductive efforts associated with abatement verification. The 
Agency's Directorate of Compliance estimates that under this 
regulation, the Agency will decrease its follow-up inspections by half, 
and OSHA estimates that State-plan agencies will do the same. With an 
estimated average salary and benefits of $50,000, cutting follow-up 
inspections by half will save enforcement agencies $1.25 million in 
resources annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\Estimated follow-up inspection staff hours:
    1,477 (Fed) safety  x  14 Avg. Hrs./follow-up = 20,678 Hrs.
     562 (Fed) health  x  46 Avg. Hrs./follow-up = 25,852 Hrs.
    5,610 (State) safety  x  6 Avg. Hrs./follow-up = 33,660 Hrs.
    1,465 (State) health  x  14 Avg. Hrs./follow-up = 20,510 Hrs.
    Total = 100,700 Hrs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although a significant portion of a Compliance Officer's time is 
spent in preparation and travel to a worksite for these inspections, at 
the worksite he or she is accompanied by one or more employer 
representatives as well as an employees representative. The Agency 
estimates that: The total hourly wage of the employer's representative 
is $25; the total wage of the employee's representative is $15 (BLS 
News, June 18, 1993); and that a follow-up inspection takes, on 
average, three hours. The Agency estimates that reducing the number of 
follow-up inspections by half will annually save employers $540,000 
[4,500 inspections  x  3 hrs  x  ($25 + $15)].

D. Economic Impact

    The Agency estimates that the economic impact on individual 
employers, industry profits, and product prices to be insignificant for 
every affected industry, and therefore concludes that the regulation is 
economically feasible. Only 15 minutes of a manager's time, on average, 
should be needed to verify abatement and provide some documentation. 
Since employers will avoid time spent responding to verification 
requests from the Agency as well as follow-up inspections, the Agency 
estimates that overall there is a net savings for employers. There is a 
savings of resources for Federal OSHA and State-plan states. As a whole 
this regulation should result in a saving of resources (Table 3).

                   Table 1.--OSHA Inspection Data 1991                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      State             
                                          Federal      plan      Total  
                                            OSHA      States            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections:                                                            
    Safety.............................     33,346     70,358    103,704
    Health.............................      8,963     14,053     23,016
                                        --------------------------------
        Total..........................     42,309     84,411    126,720
Violations:                                                             
    Willful............................      2,437        950      3,387
    Repeat.............................      3,525      6,948     10,473
    Serious............................     93,600     58,391    151,991
    Unclassified.......................         30          0         30
    Other-Than-Serious.................     50,845    167,983    218,828
    Failure to Abate...................      1,333      2,278      3,611
                                        --------------------------------
        Total grouped violations.......    151,770          -          -
        Total ungrouped violations.....    176,157    236,550    412,707
                                        ================================
        Contested Citations............      3,339      5,088      8,427
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: OSHA's Office of Regulatory Analysis.                           


             Table 2.--OSHA Follow-Up Inspection Data 1991              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      State             
                                          Federal      plan      Total  
                                           OSHA      States             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections:                                                            
    Safety.............................      1,477      5,610      7,087
    Health.............................        562      1,465      2,027
                                        --------------------------------
        Total..........................      2,039      7,075      9,114
Average Case hrs./Inspection                                            
    Safety.............................         14          6  .........
    Health.............................         46         14  .........
Violations:                                                             
    Willful............................         35         38         73
    Repeat.............................        688        423      1,111
    Serious............................        991        303      1,294
    Unclassified.......................          1          0          1
    Other-Than-Serious.................        773      1,005      1,778
    Failure to Abate...................         43         28         71
                                        ================================
        Contested citations............        119        116       235 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: OSHA's Office of Regulatory Analysis.                           


                   Table 3.--Estimates of Costs and Cost Savings of Certification of Abatement                  
                                            [In millions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Firms            Federal and State  
                                                                    ----------------------         OSHA         
                                                                                          ----------------------
                                                                       Costs     Savings     Costs      Savings 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance Cost:                                                                                                
    Abatement verification.........................................        2.6  .........          0  ..........
    Abatement plans & progress reports.............................        0.3  .........          0  ..........
                                                                    -----------           -----------           
        Total costs................................................        2.9  .........          0  ..........
COST SAVINGS:                                                                                                   
    Verification cost savings......................................  .........        5.0  .........        5.0 
    Reduction in follow-up activities..............................  .........         .5  .........        1.25
                                                                               -----------           -----------
        Total Savings..............................................  .........        5.5  .........        6.25
                                                                               ===========           ===========
        Net Savings................................................  .........        2.6  .........        6.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: OSHA's Office of Regulatory Analysis.                                                                   

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), the Agency preliminarily certifies that the proposed regulation 
would not have a significant impact on small businesses in any 
industry. As shown in the earlier section on costs of compliance, the 
cost to individual small establishments is estimated to be the same as 
for larger establishments. The costs to establishments in every 
industry are very low. In addition, OSHA inspects proportionately more 
large establishments than small establishments, and the Agency as a 
matter of policy does not perform some types of inspections on 
establishments having ten or fewer employees. The Agency therefore 
concludes that this regulation does not place any undue burden on small 
businesses.

VIII. Environmental Impact Assessment

Finding of No Significant Impact

    This regulation 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 the Department of 
Labor's NEPA procedures (29 CFR part 11). The Agency estimates that the 
regulation and employers' compliance efforts will not have any impact 
on the environment or result in the release of materials that 
contaminate natural resources or the environment.

IX. Federalism

    This proposed regulation has been reviewed in accordance with 
Executive Order 12612 (52 FR 41685, October 30, 1987), regarding 
Federalism. This Order requires that agencies, to the extent possible, 
refrain from limiting State policy options, consult with States prior 
to taking any actions which would restrict State policy options, and 
take such actions only when there is clear constitutional authority and 
the presence of a problem of national scope. The Order provides for 
preemption of State law only if there is a clear congressional intent 
for the Agency to do so. Any such preemption is to be limited to the 
extent possible.
    With respect to States that do not have State plans, the proposed 
regulation conforms to the preemption provisions of section 18 of the 
OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 667) which preempts State promulgation and 
enforcement of requirements dealing with occupational safety and health 
issues covered by Federal OSHA standards unless the State has an OSHA-
approved State plan. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management 
Association, 112 S.Ct. 2374 (1992). Since States without State plans 
are already prohibited from issuing citations for violations of 
requirements covered by Federal OSHA standards, the proposed regulation 
does not expand this limitation.
    The Agency certifies that this proposed regulation has been 
assessed in accordance with the principles, criteria, and requirements 
set forth in sections 2 through 5 of Executive Order 12612. Section 
18(c)(2) of the OSH Act [29 U.S.C. 667(c)(2)] provides that an OSHA-
approved State plan must provide for the development and enforcement of 
safety and health standards which are, or will be, at least as 
effective as the Federal program. In implementing this requirement, 29 
CFR 1902.3(d)(1) requires a State plan to provide a program for the 
enforcement of the State standards which is, or will be, at least as 
effective as that provided under the OSH Act, and provide assurances 
that the State-plan enforcement program will continue to be at least as 
effective as the Federal program. Furthermore, 29 CFR 1902.4(a) 
requires State plans to establish the same procedures and rules as 
those established by Federal OSHA, or alternative procedures and rules 
as effective as the Federal procedures and rules. In particular, a 
State plan must provide that employees be informed of their protections 
and obligations under the Act. 29 CFR 1902.4(c)(2)(iv). It must also 
provide for prompt notice to employers and employees when an alleged 
violation of standards has occurred, including the proposed abatement 
requirements, by such means as the issuance and posting of citations. 
29 CFR 1902.4(c)(2)(x). Since the proposed regulation will improve 
Federal OSHA's effectiveness in enforcing the OSH Act and, in 
particular, will foster the abatement of violations and communication 
to employees about their protections under the Act, State plans will be 
required to adopt an identical regulation, or an equivalent regulation 
that is at least as effective as the Federal regulation, within six 
months of Federal promulgation. Thus, the proposed regulation complies 
with the Executive Order 12612 with respect to State plan states 
because (1) it deals with a problem of national scope, and (2) the OSH 
Act requires that State-plan states adopt OSHA regulations or equally 
effective regulations.
    State comments are invited on this proposal and will be fully 
considered before a final regulation is promulgated.

X. State Plans

    There are currently 25 states and other jurisdictions with OSHA-
approved occupational safety and health plans. These 25 jurisdictions 
are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, 
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, 
Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, 
Virginia, Virgin Islands, Washington, and Wyoming; and Connecticut and 
New York (for State and Local government employees only).
    The 25 jurisdictions with their own OSHA-approved occupational 
safety and health plans will be required to adopt a regulation on 
abatement verification that is at least as effective as this Federal 
regulation within six months of the publication date of this Federal 
regulation (i.e. six months after the final rule is published).
    Current State abatement verification-procedures are described in 
State field operation manuals and/or directives. Although these State 
procedures may differ from the Federal procedures, the State-plan 
states, like OSHA, generally lack regulations or statutory provisions 
specifically addressing this issue, with the exception of Wyoming which 
does have a regulation requiring abatement verification. Current State 
abatement verification procedures are identical to the Federal except 
as described below:
    (1) Nine States have abatement verification forms: Alaska, 
California, Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, 
Washington, and Wyoming. On these forms, the employers describe the 
specific measures taken to correct each alleged violation. Alaska, 
Oregon, Washington, Michigan, and Kentucky also ask for documentary 
evidence. Alaska requests employers to certify under penalty of perjury 
that the violations were abated by the dates specified.
    (2) California and Minnesota ask employers to submit progress 
reports. California requests monthly progress reports for all long-term 
abatements, while Minnesota requests a progress report for all serious 
and most other violations of the State's general industry and 
construction standards.
    (3) For long-term abatements, California requests employers to 
submit an abatement plan which outlines their procedures for abatement, 
such as plans for controls to be installed, and schedules for 
engineering, purchasing, and installation. Washington schedules follow-
up inspections every six months to check progress made on long-term or 
multi-step abatement plans.
    (4) Some States (e.g., South Carolina and California) send a 
reminder letter to the employer just before the abatement verification 
form is due. Washington reminds employers by letter or telephone. 
Kentucky and California also send follow-up letters if the form is 
overdue.
    (5) Maryland tracks informal conference settlements to determine if 
abatement documentation is adequate.
    (6) Wyoming has an enforcement regulation requiring the submission 
of written documents saying when abatement has been accomplished. 
Failure to do so can result in a civil penalty. Wyoming can also take 
legal action to enforce submission of a letter of abatement.
    (7) New York, which covers only state and local government 
employees, conducts follow-up inspections to verify abatement for every 
violation; employers are not asked to send in any abatement 
verification information.

XI. Public Participation

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments, data, 
views, and arguments on any issue raised by this proposed regulation. 
These comments must be postmarked by July 18, 1994, and submitted in 
quadruplicate to the OSHA Docket Officer, Docket No. C-03, U.S. 
Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 
room N2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Written 
submissions must clearly identify the issues or specific provisions of 
the proposal which are being addressed, and the position taken with 
respect to these issues or provisions. Comments will be available for 
public inspection and copying at the above address between the hours of 
8:15 a.m. and 4:45 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Federal 
holidays). All timely submissions will additionally, be made part of 
the public record for this regulation, and will be available for 
inspection. The preliminary regulatory impact assessment and the 
exhibits cited in this document will be available for public inspection 
and copying at the above address. All comments will be carefully 
evaluated and considered by OSHA in developing the final regulation.

XII. OMB Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    5 CFR part 1320 sets forth procedures for agencies to follow in 
obtaining OMB clearance for information collection requirements under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This 
proposed abatement verification regulation requires employers to submit 
to OSHA (1) an abatement certificate and accompanying documentary 
evidence, (2) abatement plans and progress reports when specifically 
required on the citation, and (3) verification that the hazardous 
conditions cited have been corrected. In accordance with the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act and regulations issued pursuant thereto, 
OSHA certifies that it has submitted the information collection 
requirements for this proposal to OMB for review under section 3504(h) 
of the Act.
    The public reporting burden for this collection of information is 
estimated to average fifteen minutes per citation item. Send any 
comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect of these 
information-collection procedures, including suggestions for reducing 
this burden, to the Office of Information Management, Department of 
Labor, room N-1301, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, 
and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

XIII. Authority

    This document was prepared under the direction of Joseph A. Dear, 
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and health, U.S. 
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210. 
It is issued pursuant to Sections 8(c)(1), 8(g) and 9(b) of the 
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, (29 U.S.C. 657, 658).

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1903

    Abatement, Law enforcement, Occupational safety and health, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 11 day of April 1994.
Joseph A. Dear,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.

    Part 1903 of title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 1903--INSPECTIONS, CITATION, AND PROPOSED PENALTIES

    1. The authority citation for Part 1903 would be revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Secs. 8, 9, Occupational Safety and Health Act of 
1970 (29 U.S.C. 657, 658); Secretary of Labor's Order No. 12-71 (36 
FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), or 1-90 (55 FR 
9033), as applicable.
    Sections 1903.7 and 1903.19 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553.


Secs. 1903.19, 1903.20, 1903.21  [Redesignated as Secs. 1903.20, 
1903.21, 1903.22]

    2. Part 1903 would be amended by redesignating Secs. 1903.19, 
1903.20, and 1903.21 as Secs. 1903.20, 1903.21, and 1903.22, and by 
adding new Sec. 1903.19, to read as follows:


Sec. 1903.19  Abatement verification.

    (a) Scope and application. This regulation requires all employers 
to verify the abatement of violative conditions set forth in citations, 
as detailed below.
    (b) Definitions.
    Abatement date means (1) the date set forth in a citation for the 
abatement of a violation when the citation item has not been contested; 
(2) when a citation item has been contested and the Commission has 
issued a final order, the date computed by adding to the final order 
date either the amount of time allowed for abatement in the original 
citation or, if the order modifies the abatement period, the newly 
specified period; (3) the date for abatement expressly set forth in a 
final order; (4) the date for abatement set forth in a PMA final order; 
or (5) the date for abatement expressly set forth in a settlement 
agreement.
    Abatement plan is a written, detailed plan outlining a schedule for 
the implementation of measures to achieve abatement.
    Abatement verification includes a final abatement certificate, an 
abatement plan and progress reports.
    Area Director means the employee or officer regularly or 
temporarily in charge of an Area Office of the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, or any other person or 
persons who are authorized to act for such employee or officer.
    Assistant Secretary means the Assistant Secretary of Labor for 
Occupational Safety and Health, or designated representative.
    Citation item is a separately designated portion of a citation 
containing one or more instances of violation.
    Commission is the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
    Equipment is a machine or device, powered or unpowered, used to do 
work.
    Final order date is (1) where the citation item has not been 
contested, the fifteenth working day after the employer's receipt of 
the notification of proposed penalty with respect to a citation item; 
(2) the thirtieth day after the date on which a decision of a 
Commission administrative law judge, including an order approving a 
settlement or a withdrawal of a notice of contest, has been docketed 
with the Commission, unless a member of the Commission has directed 
review; (3) where review has been directed, the thirtieth day after the 
date on which the Commission issues its decision, including but not 
limited to, an order approving a settlement or a withdrawal of a notice 
of contest, or an order severing citation items from a case; or (4) the 
date on which a court of appeals issues a decision where the Commission 
order has been previously stayed.
    PMA is a petition for modification of the abatement date.
    PMA final order is (1) OSHA's approval of an uncontested PMA; (2) 
an order of a Commission administrative law judge granting a PMA, in 
whole or in part, unless the judge's decision is directed for review 
within thirty days of its docketing with the Commission; (3) an order 
of Members of the Commission granting a PMA, in whole or in part, where 
review has been directed; or (4) an order of a court of appeals 
granting a PMA, in whole or in part.
    Progress report is a written report explaining what measures have 
been taken, if any, in the process of achieving abatement of a 
violative condition in a citation item, other than measures ultimately 
achieving abatement; and the dates on which those measures have been 
taken.
    (c) Abatement certificate. Each employer shall submit to the Area 
Director issuing the citation an abatement certificate with respect to 
each citation item, and do so within thirty calendar days after the 
abatement date for the citation item.
    (1) The abatement certificate shall contain the following 
information:
    (i) Each citation item;
    (ii) A statement noting whether or not abatement has been 
accomplished with respect to each citation item and instance listed in 
the citation;
    (iii) A description of the measures taken to accomplish abatement;
    (iv) The date abatement was accomplished;
    (v) If abatement has not been accomplished, the reason(s) for not 
abating;
    (vi) The signature of the employer or the employer's duly 
authorized representative;
    (vii) The date of the signature.
    (2) If the employer has initially stated in an abatement 
certificate that a particular citation item has not been abated, and 
later the employer abates the condition, the employer shall submit to 
the Area Director issuing the citation a new abatement certificate 
within five calendar days after abatement.
    (3) Abatement certificates for more than one citation item may be 
combined in a single document.
    (4) Each abatement certificate with respect to a citation item 
shall be accompanied by documentary evidence that is sufficient to 
demonstrate clearly that the hazard has been corrected.
    (d) Abatement plan. (1) An Area Director may require in a citation 
that the employer submit a formal plan for the abatement of safety and 
health violations in instances where multiple steps or long-term 
abatement actions are necessary.
    (2) When called for in a citation, the employer shall prepare a 
written, signed, and dated abatement plan with respect to each citation 
item for which the plan is required.
    (3) Abatement plans for more than one citation item may be combined 
within a single document.
    (4) The abatement plan shall be submitted to the Area Director 
issuing the citation within twenty-five calendar days after the date of 
the final order or the date of the PMA final order.
    (e) Progress reports. An Area Director, at his or her discretion, 
may require progress reports in a citation where multi-step abatement 
is deemed appropriate.
    (1) The Area Director shall specify the citation item with respect 
to which the progress reports are required, the measures which the Area 
Director expects to be taken on or before the submission of each 
progress report, and the date for the submission of each progress 
report, expressed as the number of calendar days from the date of the 
final order or the date of the PMA final order.
    (2) The employer shall submit to the Area Director the requested 
progress reports with respect to each citation item for which they are 
required under the abatement plan.
    (3) Progress reports for more than one citation item may be 
combined within a single document.
    (4) Progress reports shall be submitted at intervals specified by 
the Area Director in the citation, but the first progress report shall 
not be submitted earlier than thirty calendar days after the date of 
the final order or the date of the PMA final order.
    (f) Tagging cited equipment. (1) The employer shall affix a 
``Warning'' tag on all cited equipment upon receipt of the citation.
    (2) The design, application, and use of the tag required by this 
section shall be in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.145(f)(4).
    (3) In addition to the information set forth in 1910.145(f), the 
tag shall identify the equipment, state that a citation has been 
issued, and identify where the citation is posted.
    (4) The employer shall ensure that the tag remains affixed to the 
cited equipment in a conspicuous location at or near the controls of 
such equipment and/or the hazardous portion of the equipment, until the 
cited equipment is brought into compliance with OSHA requirements or 
the equipment is permanently removed from service. The temporary 
removal from service of cited equipment is not compliance with OSHA 
requirements for the purpose of this section. The protection and 
posting requirements of paragraph (i)(4) of this section are also 
applicable to this paragraph.
    (g) Document Transmittal. When this section requires submission of 
a document to the Area Director, it may be submitted by first-class 
mail, postage prepaid, facsimile transmission, or hand delivery. When 
the document is mailed, the date of submission is the date of the 
postmark. When the document is submitted by facsimile transmission or 
hand delivery, the date of submission is the date when the document is 
received by the Area Director.

Note: Receipt of an employer's documents by the Agency under this 
regulation does not constitute an agreement that the employer is in 
compliance.

    (h) Accuracy of documentation. The employer shall assure that each 
statement in a document or accompanying documentation required by this 
section is accurate.
    (i) Posting requirements. A copy of each document required to be 
submitted to the Area Director shall be posted, at the time of 
submission, at or near each place the violation(s) described in the 
citation occurred.
    (1) Where, because of an employer's operations, it is not 
practicable to post a document at or near the location of the 
violation(s), such document shall be posted, unedited, in a prominent 
place where it will be readily observable by all affected employees.
    (2) Where it is physically impracticable, because of a document's 
size or magnitude, to post abatement plans and progress reports, a 
notice to affected employees shall be posted indicating the location 
where the document(s) can be reviewed.
    (3) The abatement certificates, abatement plan(s) and progress 
reports shall be provided, upon request for examination and copying, to 
employees, to employee representatives, and to the Assistant Secretary.

Note: If employers are engaged in activities which are 
geographically dispersed (see Sec. 1903.2(b)), the document may be 
posted at the location where employees report each day. If employees 
do not primarily work at, or report to, a single location (see 
Sec. 1903.2(b)), the document may be posted at the location where 
employees work.

    (4) The employer shall assure that any document required to be 
posted by this section is not altered, defaced, or covered by other 
material.
    (5) Any document required to be posted by this section shall remain 
posted until the violation has been abated, or for six calendar days, 
whichever is later.
    (j) Penalties. Any employer failing to comply with the provisions 
of this section shall be subject to citation and penalty in accordance 
with the provisions of Section 9 and 17 of the Act.
    (k) False statements. False statements knowingly made in any 
document required by this section are subject to criminal penalties set 
forth in section 17(g) of the Act. False statements knowingly and 
willfully made in any document required by this section are subject to 
the criminal penalties set forth in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

[FR Doc. 94-9109 Filed 4-18-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P