Permit Required Confined Spaces

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1910

[Docket No. S-019A]

RIN 1218-AA51

Permit Required Confined Spaces

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

Department of Labor.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA issued a general industry standard on Permit-Required

Confined Spaces (permit spaces) on January 14, 1993 (58 FR 4462). The

standard became effective on April 15, 1993.

On March 15, 1993 the United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC

(USWA) petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th

Circuit for judicial review of the final permit space standard under

section 6(f) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. In particular,

the USWA contended that Sec. 1910.146(k)(2), which addresses the rescue

of permit space entrants by outside (off-site) rescue services, was

vague and ineffective. The USWA also noted that the permit space

standard lacks a provision which would provide employees or their

designated representative the opportunity to observe any monitoring or

testing required by the standard.

The language of Sec. 1910.146(k)(3)(i), which specifies the point

of attachment of a retrieval line to a permit space entrant, may be

unnecessarily restrictive. The ADS Environmental Services Company, a

contractor which performs work in sewers, has petitioned OSHA for a

variance to paragraph (k)(3)(i). ADS has demonstrated that, for their

operations, a point of attachment in front of the entrant at about mid-

shoulder level is adequate to meet OSHA's objective that an entrant

present the smallest possible profile during removal.

Based upon these concerns, OSHA is now proposing to revise

paragraph (k) of Sec. 1910.146, to state more clearly the employer's

duty to ensure effective rescue capability for employees who enter

permit spaces and to allow more flexibility in the point of attachment

of a retrieval line to an entrant. OSHA is also raising the issue of

whether to add provisions to Sec. 1910.146 to provide affected

employees, or their designated representatives, with the opportunity to

observe the evaluation of confined spaces, including atmospheric

testing or monitoring, and to have access to the results of such

evaluations and monitoring.

DATES: Written comments and information on this proposed revision must

be postmarked by February 27, 1995.

Requests for public hearings on this proposal must be postmarked by

February 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and information on this proposed rule are

to be submitted in quadruplicate to the Docket Office, Docket No. S-

019A, United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, Room N2634, 200 Constitution Avenue N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20210, telephone (202) 219-7894. Written comments limited to 10

pages or less in length also may be transmitted by facsimile to (202)

219-5046, provided that the original and 3 copies are sent to the

Docket Office thereafter. Comments, requests for hearings and

information received may be inspected and copied in the Docket Office.

Requests for a public hearing on this proposal are to be sent in

quadruplicate to Mr. Thomas Hall, Division of Consumer Affairs,

Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N3649, 200

Constitution Avenue N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Information, Division of

Consumer Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N3647, 200

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, (202) 219-8151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Many employees enter and work in spaces which, because of their

configuration, difficulty of entry or other factors, pose increased

risk of exposure to serious hazards. In January, 1993, OSHA promulgated

a standard (Sec. 1910.146, 58 FR 4462, January 14, 1993) that requires

employers to protect employees assigned to enter Permit-Required

Confined Spaces (permit spaces) from these hazards. On June 29, 1993

(58 FR 34844), OSHA published a notice which corrected typographical

errors in the regulatory text and clarified several provisions of the

permit space final rule and appendices. On May 19, 1994 (59 FR 26114),

OSHA published a technical amendment to Sec. 1910.146 which added a

metric equivalent to paragraph (k)(3)(ii) and further revised the

``Atmospheric Monitoring'' section of non-mandatory Appendix E, ``Sewer

System Entry.''

The permit space standard provides a comprehensive regulatory

framework within which employers can effectively protect employees who

enter permit spaces. The standard provides for the establishment of

written permit space programs, authorization of entry through written

permits, and the implementation of measures (e.g., testing and

monitoring of spaces, control of hazards, stationing of an attendant to

monitor entry, employee training, and availability of rescue and

emergency medical personnel) necessary for safe entry operations.

On March 15, 1993 the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) filed a

petition for judicial review of the final PRCS standard in the United

States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. On June 22, 1993, the

USWA sent OSHA a letter (Ex. 1), which detailed their objections to the

final PRCS standard. The USWA objections dealt, in part, with the

provisions of existing Sec. 1910.146(k)(2), regarding the use of off-

site personnel to perform permit space rescues. These concerns are

discussed more fully below.

II. Events and Considerations Leading to This Proposed Rule

A. Rescue and Emergency Services

While compliance with the permit space standard will generally

enable authorized entrants to enter and exit permit spaces safely, OSHA

recognizes that there may be circumstances where hazards arise so

quickly or unexpectedly that entrants need assistance in exiting a

permit space. Paragraphs (d)(9) and (k) of the standard set

requirements for the rescue and emergency services needed in such

circumstances. Also, paragraph (h)(5) of the standard requires

authorized entrants to initiate self-rescue where appropriate, and

paragraphs (i)(6), (i)(7) and (i)(9) require attendants, where

appropriate, to order evacuation of the permit space, to summon rescue

and emergency services and to perform non-entry rescue. In promulgating

the final rule (58 FR 4524), OSHA anticipated that compliance with

these provisions would maximize the likelihood that authorized permit

space entrants would be protected from death or serious injury should

an emergency arise during entry operations.

OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

have documented (58 FR 4465) that a majority of permit space fatalities

have been would-be rescuers who entered permit spaces without the

necessary training or equipment. The Agency believes that this

information demonstrates the need for employers to implement rescue

measures which protect rescuers from death or serious injury (58 FR

4526). OSHA concluded, based on its review of the rulemaking record of

the permit-space standard, that non-entry rescue involves the least

danger for rescuers and that a retrieval system (body harness attached

to a lifeline extending outside the permit space) will generally be the

appropriate form of non-entry rescue.

Accordingly, the Agency required, in paragraph (k)(3) of the permit

space standard, that each authorized entrant wear a body harness with

attached lifeline and that the lifeline be attached to a secure

anchorage point outside the permit space, except where the employer can

establish that the use of a retrieval system would increase the overall

risk of entry or would not contribute to the rescue of the entrant.

OSHA anticipated that the retrieval system, where used, would enable a

rescuer (either the permit space attendant or personnel summoned by the

attendant) to extricate an entrant without being exposed to permit

space hazards.

OSHA recognized that the use of a retrieval system will be

infeasible in some instances. Accordingly, Sec. 1910.146 also contains

requirements pertaining to rescuers who enter permit spaces to perform

rescues, in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of the final rule. These

requirements were included to ensure that designated rescuers were

adequately trained and equipped to safely (for both authorized entrants

and the rescuers themselves) perform effective rescues.

Paragraph (k)(1) applies to employers, such as fire departments and

contract rescue services, whose employees will perform rescue at other

employers' workplaces, as well as to employers who have their own

employees perform rescues. OSHA recognizes that many employees who

perform rescue are not employees of the host employer. In addition,

fire department and other public sector rescue service employees are

only covered by OSHA standards in State Plan States. Section 3(5) of

the OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 652) provides that the term ``employer'' does

not include the United States or any State or political subdivision of

a State. For States which administer approved OSHA state plans, section

18(c)(6) of the OSH Act provides that State and local government

employees in State Plan States are covered by the State OSHA standard

equivalents to the Federal OSHA standards. OSHA believes, based on the

number of informal inquiries received, that many State and local

governmental entities whose employees provide rescue services for

permit spaces are already voluntarily complying with the provisions of

Sec. 1910.146(k)(1) even where there is no legal requirement to do so.

The ability of rescue and emergency services to provide timely and

effective assistance to authorized entrants is a critical element of

compliance with paragraphs (d)(9) and (k) of the standard. Under the

permit space standard, affected employers can set up their own

employee-staffed rescue services or arrange to have persons other than

their own employees provide rescue services. As discussed in the

preamble to the final rule (58 FR 4524), OSHA anticipates that a rescue

and emergency service composed of an employer's own employees will

usually have a faster response to a rescue summons than a rescue

service composed of persons other than the employer's own employees

because the employer's own rescuers are far more likely to be ``on-

site.'' Accordingly, the Agency believes that it is appropriate to use

a rescue service composed of persons other than on-site employees only

when there is reasonable assurance that the designated rescuers can

effectively respond to a rescue summons in a timely fashion.

OSHA notes that it also may be feasible for an employer to select a

mix of on-site and off-site (or a mix of employee and non-employee)

rescue capabilities for that employer's particular circumstances. The

provisions of existing Sec. 1910.146(k) do not preclude such

arrangements. The standard requires simply that employers plan ahead

for rescue and ensure that an adequate rescue capability is in place

for permit space entries.

Paragraph (k)(2) of the standard applies to employers who arrange

to have persons other than their own employees provide permit space

rescue and emergency services. Paragraph (k)(2) requires affected

employers to inform the rescue service of the hazards they may confront

when called upon to perform rescue at the host employer's facility and

to provide the rescue service with access, for planning and practice

rescue purposes, to all permit spaces from which rescue may be

necessary.

Paragraph (d)(9) of the standard requires employers to ``Develop

and implement procedures for summoning rescue and emergency services,

for rescuing entrants from permit spaces (emphasis added), for

providing necessary emergency services to rescued employees, and for

preventing unauthorized personnel from attempting a rescue.'' OSHA

believes that the requirements of paragraph (d)(9), in conjunction with

the requirements of paragraph (k), place a responsibility on employers

to take whatever actions are necessary to provide for the effective

rescue of authorized entrants from permit spaces. Further, OSHA

believes that any host employer who fails to consider such factors as

the response time, equipment and state of training of rescue services

not composed of the host employer's own employees, when an employer

chooses to arrange for such services, is not complying with paragraphs

(d)(9) and (k).

In their June 22, 1993 letter to OSHA, the USWA contended that

existing Sec. 1910.146(k)(2) does not specifically address the

timeliness with which a rescue service must respond to a rescue

summons. The USWA believes that such an omission permits the host

employer to arrange for the use of a rescue service without any

consideration of the rescue service's capability to respond in a timely

manner. According to the USWA, this situation would very likely result

in the death or serious injury of authorized entrants, because there

would be no assurance that the rescue service could arrive in time to

perform an effective rescue.

In addition, the USWA stated that the standard fails to include any

meaningful provisions dealing with accountability for the adequacy of a

non-host employer rescue service. Thus, they believe, an employer could

avoid responsibility for the adequacy (e.g., the equipping and

training) of rescue and emergency services. Further, the USWA contends

that existing Sec. 1910.146(k)(2) discourages employers from providing

an employee-staffed on-site rescue service and encourages the

disbanding of any such existing rescue services.

The USWA concluded, based upon the above stated concerns, that the

permit space standard should require that all host employers establish

and use rescue services composed only of their own employees.

As has been discussed, OSHA believes that the final rule does

address the need for the host employer to consider timeliness of rescue

and accountability in its selection of outside rescue services.

However, the Agency recognizes that these areas of the standard may not

have been set forth with sufficient clarity or specificity in the

regulatory text. Therefore, OSHA is proposing to revise paragraph

(k)(2) so that the standard more clearly states what an employer must

do when it arranges to have persons other than its own employees

provide permit space rescue and emergency services. (See Section III.,

Summary and Explanation of the Proposed Revision.)

B. Retrieval Systems

Paragraph (k)(3)(i) of the final standard contains a provision

requiring that retrieval systems employ a retrieval line which is

attached at the center of the entrant's back near shoulder level or

above the entrant's head. In the final standard's preamble (58 FR 4531)

the reason given for specifying the attachment point for the retrieval

line is ``so that the entrant will present the smallest possible

profile during removal, in case a rescue becomes necessary.'' It has

come to OSHA's attention that the language of paragraph (k)(3)(i) may

be unnecessarily restrictive. The ADS Environmental Services Company, a

contractor which provides flow monitoring services in sewers, has

requested that OSHA grant a variance (Ex. 2) from the requirement that

the point of attachment either be centered near the entrant's back near

shoulder level or overhead. For operational purposes, the ADS Company

attaches the retrieval line in front of the entrant at about mid-

shoulder level. ADS has satisfactorily demonstrated that their method

of retrieval line attachment is equally as effective as the two methods

specified in the existing OSHA standard in meeting the stated objective

of presenting the smallest possible entrant profile during removal.

Accordingly, and in keeping with the Agency's goal of stating standards

in performance-oriented language to the extent reasonable, OSHA

believes it is appropriate to amend Sec. 1910.146(k)(3)(i) to permit

any point of attachment of a retrieval line to a chest or full body

harness which meets the goal of presenting the smallest possible

entrant profile during removal from a permit space.

C. Employee Participation in Exposure Monitoring

In addition to suggesting changes to the rescue provisions, the

USWA also stated, in its June 22, 1993 letter, (Ex. 1) that the Permit

Space standard should contain a provision which requires that affected

employees, or their designated representatives, be permitted to observe

any exposure monitoring required by the standard. The USWA contends

that the inclusion of such a provision is required by section 8(c)(3)

of the Act, and that such a provision is routinely placed in all of

OSHA's chemical-specific standards.

In response to a comment from the United Auto Workers (UAW) (Ex.

19-38), Issue 3 of the Hearing Notice (54 FR 41462) requested input

regarding worker participation in the design and implementation of a

Permit Space program. As discussed in the final rule (58 FR 4484-85)

most of the comments and testimony received expressed general support

for the concept of employee participation, but did not provide specific

suggestions as to how that participation should be implemented. In

responding to Issue 3, the UAW testimony at the public hearings

repeated their NPRM recommendation that the permit space standard

require active employee participation in the design and implementation

of permit space programs, while adding a suggestion that employers

provide employees with an opportunity to observe the monitoring of

permit spaces (Chicago Tr. 347). In its post hearing brief (Ex. 142),

the UAW repeated the suggestion for observation of monitoring without

elaboration.

OSHA did not include specific requirements for employee

participation in the final rule because the Agency believed it would be

very difficult to mandate labor-management collaboration and to

determine how disagreements would be resolved. In addition, OSHA stated

that employees would have input to the Permit Space program through

Secs. 1910.146(d)(13) (review of permit space program) and (g)(2)(iv)

(retraining when there are deviations from the permit space

procedures).

In response to the submission by the USWA, the Agency has agreed to

raise an issue for comment regarding employee observation of

monitoring. OSHA does not believe that section 8(c)(3) of the Act

mandates the inclusion of a requirement for employee observation of

monitoring in safety standards. However, the Agency is considering

whether such a provision should be added to the permit space standard

based on the concerns expressed and on the record developed as a result

of this notice.

Accordingly, OSHA requests comment from interested parties as to

whether the Agency should revise Sec. 1910.146 by adding a requirement

that affected employees, or their designated representatives, be

permitted to observe the evaluation of confined space conditions,

including any testing or monitoring conducted under the permit space

standard. The Agency requests that commenters provide the reasons for

their views, and requests the submission of any data or information

which would be useful to OSHA in making an informed decision regarding

this issue.

The USWA also believes that the Permit Space standard should

contain a provision which requires that the results of any evaluation

of a permit space, including the results of any atmospheric monitoring

conducted, be made available to employees or their designated

representative. OSHA agrees that it is important that this information

be made available to permit space entrants and believes that the

existing permit space standard already includes provisions to assure

that this objective is achieved. Existing Sec. 1910.146(f)(10) requires

that the results of initial and periodic tests performed under existing

Sec. 1910.146(d)(5) be entered on the entry permit, and existing

Sec. 1910.146(e)(3) requires that the permit be made available to all

authorized entrants at the time of entry.

Accordingly, OSHA solicits comments regarding the issue of whether

the existing standard provides adequate employee access to the results

of testing and monitoring in permit spaces. The Agency also encourages

interested parties who believe that the existing provisions are

inadequate to provide suggestions regarding how OSHA can correct any

such inadequacies. OSHA may decide, based upon the comments received

concerning this issue, to add a provision or provisions to the permit

space rule replacing or strengthening the current provisions.

III. Summary and Explanation of the Proposed Revision

OSHA proposes to make several changes to paragraph (k)(2) of

Sec. 1910.146 so that the standard will more clearly state the duties

and responsibilities of employers (host employers) who arrange for

persons other than their own employees to perform permit space rescue

in their workplace. OSHA believes that the proposed changes will make

it clearer that such employers must select rescue services which are

capable of responding in a timely manner and which are properly

trained, equipped and capable of functioning appropriately to perform

permit space rescues at the host employer's facility.

First, OSHA proposes to add the parenthetical ``(outside

rescuers)'' between ``employees'' and ``perform'' in the introductory

text of paragraph (k)(2), and to add the words ``ensure that'' to the

end of the introductory text to paragraph (k)(2). That introductory

text would then read:

When an employer (host employer) arranges to have persons other

than the host employer's employees (outside rescuers) perform permit

space rescue, the host employer shall ensure that:

The parenthetical ``(outside rescuers)'' is proposed to be added to

clarify and simplify what is meant by the phrase ``persons other than

the host employer's employees''. The words ``ensure that'' at the end

of the introductory text are proposed to be added to clarify and

strengthen the requirements in paragraph (k)(2).

Second, OSHA proposes to add new paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and

(k)(2)(ii). Proposed new paragraph (k)(2)(i) specifically requires host

employers to ensure that arranged-for rescue services can effectively

respond in a timely manner to a rescue summons. The proposed paragraph

clearly indicates that a host employer must take into account a rescue

service's capability in terms of response time and may only select a

rescue service which satisfies the pertinent criteria.

Proposed new paragraph (k)(2)(ii) specifically requires host

employers to ensure that arranged-for rescue services are equipped,

trained and capable of functioning appropriately to perform permit

space rescues at the host employer's facility. The proposed provision

clearly indicates that host employers must evaluate a prospective

rescue service's capabilities and verify that the needed capabilities

are present before selecting that rescue service to perform permit

space rescues. The host employer would be clearly prohibited from

selecting any rescue service which does not meet the criteria of

proposed (k)(2)(i) and (k)(2)(ii).

Third, OSHA proposes to redesignate existing paragraphs (k)(2)(i)

and (k)(2)(ii) as paragraphs (k)(2)(iii) and (k)(2)(iv), respectively.

The language of these two provisions has been modified slightly to fit

the revised introductory text of paragraph (k)(2), but no changes to

the existing requirements have been made.

OSHA emphasizes that the intent of proposed paragraphs (k)(2)(i)

and (k)(2)(ii) is to clarify the existing requirements in paragraphs

(d)(9) and (k)(2) of Sec. 1910.146, as these requirements have been

interpreted by the Agency. As discussed earlier, OSHA believes that,

even under the current rule, an employer must take timeliness and

accountability into account if that employer is to have a truly

effective rescue capability. The Agency acknowledges, as discussed in

the preamble to the permit space standard (58 FR 4527), that the rescue

provisions of the standard will not ensure that all incapacitated

entrants will be successfully rescued from permit spaces. The fact that

a host employer has done all that it can, before any arrangements for

using an outside rescue service are finalized, to ensure that a rescue

service is fully capable of performing a timely rescue at its workplace

does not guarantee that an actual rescue attempt by that rescue service

will be successful. Thus, OSHA's measurement of a host employer's

compliance with proposed paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (k)(2)(ii) will not

be based solely upon a rescue service's actual performance during any

single instance, but instead upon the host employer's total effort

prior to arranging for an outside rescue service to ensure that the

prospective rescue service is indeed capable, in terms of overall

timeliness, training and equipment, of performing an effective rescue

at the host employer's workplace.

OSHA is also proposing to amend paragraph (k)(3)(i) so that the

provision dealing with the point of attachment of a retrieval line

becomes more performance-oriented. The existing provision requires that

the point of attachment be either at the center of the entrant's back

near shoulder level or above the entrant's head. OSHA specified those

points of attachment because the Agency believed that their use would

enable the entrant to present the smallest possible profile during

retrieval. However, OSHA acknowledges that there may be circumstances

under which alternate body harness attachment points may be at least as

safe and effective as either of the specified locations. Accordingly,

The Agency proposes to allow any other point of attachment which

enables the entrant's body to present the smallest possible profile

during retrieval. As amended, the first sentence of paragraph (k)(3)(i)

would read as follows:

Each authorized entrant shall use a chest or full body harness,

with a retrieval line attached at the center of the entrant's back

near shoulder level, above the entrant's head or other point which

assures that the entrant will present the smallest possible profile

during retrieval.

IV. Regulatory Impact Assessment

As explained elsewhere, the Agency considers the new language a

clarification of the existing standard, and not a new burden on

employers. Therefore, the Agency believes no new costs are implied by

this modification.

V. Federalism

This proposed amendment has been reviewed in accordance with

Executive Order 12612 (52 FR 31685, October 30, 1987) regarding

Federalism. This order requires that agencies, to the extent possible,

refrain from limiting State policy options and consult with States

prior to taking any action. Agencies may act 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.

Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970

expresses Congress' clear intent to preempt State laws relating to

issues on which Federal OSHA has promulgated occupational safety and

health standards. Under the OSHA Act, a State can avoid preemption only

if it submits, and obtains Federal approval of, a plan for the

development of such standards and their enforcement. Occupational

safety and health standards developed by such Plan-States must, among

other things, be at least as effective in providing safe and healthful

employment and places of employment as Federal Standards. Where such

standards are applicable to products distributed or used in interstate

commerce, they may not unduly burden commerce and must be justified by

compelling local conditions (See Section 18(c)(2) of the OSHA Act).

This proposed rule is drafted so that employees in every State will

be protected by general, performance-oriented standards. To the extent

that there are State or regional peculiarities caused by the terrain,

the climate or other factors, States would be able, under the OSHA Act,

to develop their own State standards to deal with any special problems.

And, under the Act, if a State develops an approved State program, it

could make additional requirements in its standards. Moreover, the

performance nature of this standard, of and by itself, allows for

flexibility by States and employers to provide as much safety as

possible using varying methods consonant with conditions in each State.

In short, there is a clear national problem related to occupational

safety and health concerning entry into permit-required confined

spaces. Those States which elect to participate under the statute would

not be preempted by this regulation and would be able to address

special, local conditions within the framework provided by this

performance-oriented standard.

VI. Public Participation

Written Comments: Interested persons are invited to submit written

data, views and arguments with respect to this proposal. These comments

must be postmarked by (February 27, 1995, in the Federal Register) and

submitted to the Docket Office, Docket S-019A, room N2634, U.S.

Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20210. Written submissions must

clearly identify the issues or specific provisions of the proposal

which are addressed and the position taken with respect to each issue

or provision.

The data, views and arguments that are submitted will be available

for public inspection and copying at the above address. All timely

submissions received will be made a part of the record of this

proceeding.

Hearing Requests: Additionally, under section 6(b)(3) of the OSHA

Act and 29 CFR 1911.11, interested persons may file objections to the

proposed amendment and request an informal hearing. The objections and

hearing request should be submitted to the Docket Office at the above

address and must comply with the following conditions:

1. The objections and hearing requests must include the name and

address of the objector;

2. The objections and hearing requests must be postmarked on or

before February 27, 1995;

3. The objections and hearing requests must specify with

particularity the provisions of the proposed amendment to which

objection is taken and must state the grounds therefore;

4. Each objection and hearing request must be separately stated and

numbered, and;

5. The objections and hearing requests must be accompanied by a

detailed summary of the evidence proposed to be adduced at the

requested hearing.

VII. State Plan States

The 25 States and territories with their own OSHA-approved

occupational safety and health plans must adopt a comparable amended

standard within six months of the publication date of a final standard.

These 25 States and territories are: Alaska, Arizona, California,

Connecticut (for State and local government employees only), Hawaii,

Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New

Mexico, New York (for state and local government employees only), North

Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah,

Vermont, Virginia, Virgin Islands, Washington and Wyoming. Until such

time as a State standard is promulgated, Federal OSHA will provide

interim enforcement assistance, as appropriate, in these states.

VIII. List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910

Confined spaces, Monitoring, Occupational safety and health,

Personal protective equipment, Rescue equipment, Retrieval lines,

Safety.

IX. 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 Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20210.

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 4, 6(b) and 8 of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657), Secretary of

Labor's Order No. 1-90 (55 FR 9033) and 29 CFR part 1911, OSHA proposes

to amend Sec. 1910.146 of 29 CFR as set forth below.

Signed at Washington, D.C. this 21st day of November 1994.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

PART 1910--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS

1. The authority citation for subpart J of part 1910 continues to

read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 6, and 8, Occupational Safety and Health Act

of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of Labor's Order No. 12-

71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736) or 1-90 (55

FR 9033), as applicable. Sections 1910.141, 1910.142, 1910.145,

1910.146, and 1910.147 also issued under 29 CFR part 1911.

2. Paragraphs (k)(2) and (k)(3)(i) of 29 CFR 1910.146 would be

revised to read as follows:

Sec. 1910.146 Permit required confined spaces.

* * * * *

(k) Rescue and emergency services. * * *

(2) When an employer (host employer) arranges to have persons other

than the host employer's employees (outside rescuer) perform permit

space rescue, the host employer shall ensure that:

(i) The outside rescuer can effectively respond in a timely manner

to a rescue summons.

(ii) The outside rescuer is equipped, trained and capable of

functioning appropriately to perform permit space rescues at the host

employer's facility.

(iii) The outside rescuer is aware of the hazards they may confront

when called on to perform rescue at the host employer's facility.

(iv) The outside rescuer is provided with access to all permit

spaces from which rescue may be necessary so that the outside rescuer

can develop appropriate rescue plans and practice rescue operations.

(3) * * *

(i) Each authorized entrant shall use a chest or full body harness,

with a retrieval line attached at the center of the entrant's back near

shoulder level, above the entrant's head or other point which the

employer can establish will ensure that the entrant will present the

smallest possible profile during removal.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 94-29117 Filed 11-25-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P