Exit Routes (Means of Egress)

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1910

[Docket No. S-052]

RIN 1218-AB55

Exit Routes (Means of Egress)

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

ACTION: Proposed Rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is

proposing to revise Subpart E of Part 1910, Means of Egress. The

purpose of this revision is to rewrite the existing requirements of

Subpart E in plain English so they will be more understandable to

employers, employees, and others who use them. This revision does not

in any way change the regulatory obligations of employers or the safety

and health protections provided to employees. To further the plain

English goal, OSHA is also proposing to change the name of Subpart E

from ``Means of Egress'' to ``Exit Routes.''

OSHA is proposing two alternative plain English versions of this

revision to Subpart E. The first version is organized in the

traditional OSHA regulatory format. The second version uses a question

and answer format. OSHA invites interested parties to comment on the

content and effectiveness of the proposed changes and on the plain

English version of Subpart E that they prefer.

DATES: Comments and requests for hearings must be postmarked no later

than November 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for hearings must be submitted in

quadruplicate to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. S-052, Room N-2625,

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC

20210. (Telephone: 202-219-7894). Comments of 10 pages or less may be

faxed to the Docket Office, if followed by hard copy mailed within two

days. The OSHA Docket Office fax number is (202)-219-5046.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Anne Cyr, OSHA Office of

Information and Consumer Affairs, Room N-3647, U.S. Department of

Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone

(202)-219-8148.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In 1971, acting under section 6(a) of the Occupational Safety and

Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 655(a), OSHA adopted

hundreds of national consensus standards as occupational safety and

health standards. Over the ensuing twenty-five years, OSHA has become

aware that these standards may be overly wordy, difficult to

understand, repetitive, and internally inconsistent. Complaints about

OSHA's technical, ``nitpicky'' standards have been repeated too many

times to recount.

To make OSHA standards more ``user-friendly,'' President Clinton,

as part of the Administration's Reinventing Government initiative,

together with Secretary of Labor Robert Reich and Assistant Secretary

Joe Dear, has committed the Agency to reviewing OSHA's standards ``to

determine which should be rewritten in plain English.'' OSHA's first

``plain English'' initiative is a proposed revision of Subpart E of

Part 1910, which addresses means of egress (exit routes). In revising

Subpart E, the goal of OSHA is to make its standards more

understandable to those who use them. Toward this goal, the proposed

revisions to Subpart E reorganize the text, remove internal

inconsistencies among sections, and eliminate duplicate requirements.

In addition, the requirements of Subpart E have been rewritten

using simple, straightforward, easy to understand, terms. The proposed

rules are performance-oriented and shorter than the existing standards.

They reduce the number of subparagraphs, and contain fewer cross-

references to other OSHA standards. Each of the two proposed versions

of Subpart E includes a detailed table of contents, which is intended

to make the standards easier to use.

Both proposed versions leave unchanged the regulatory obligations

placed on employers by Subpart E and the safety and health protections

that it provides to employees. OSHA believes, however, that the revised

Subpart E, which is more performance oriented than the existing

Subpart, will make more compliance options available to employers.

Since OSHA is not proposing to change the substantive requirements

of Subpart E, the Agency believes that the significant risk test

described by the Supreme Court in American Petroleum Institute v.

Industrial Union Department [448 U.S. 607(1980)] does not apply to this

rulemaking. Further, OSHA has concluded that this rulemaking neither

requires technological changes nor imposes increased costs. In fact,

the proposed rule may decrease compliance costs by providing employers

with more flexible compliance options. Accordingly, OSHA has determined

that an analysis of the technological and economic feasibility of the

standard is not necessary.

Finally, although OSHA recognizes that some portions of Subpart E

may warrant updating, the Agency is not proposing to update the

requirements of Subpart E at this time. Instead, the proposal addresses

only one aspect of Subpart E: the overly technical language of the

existing requirements. At a later date, the Agency will consider

whether substantive revisions to these requirements are warranted.

[[Page 47713]]

II. Why Redraft OSHA Regulations in Plain English?

Since OSHA's adoption in 1971 of national consensus and established

Federal standards under Section 6(a) of the Act, many of these ``start-

up standards'' have been criticized for being written in a manner that

can easily be misunderstood by employers and employees. For example,

Robert Moran, former Chairman of the Occupational Safety and Health

Review Commission, was an early critic of these standards, noting that

they:

Were not written in terms amenable to enforcement

Were not exclusively concerned with worker safety (that

is, requirements directed at the safety of equipment, buildings,

consumers, the general public, and workers were intermingled)

Were not specific enough so that an ordinary business

person or employee could understand them

Included ``conflicts and inconsistencies.''

[Moran, Cite OSHA for Violations, Occupational Safety and Health,

Mar.--Apr. 1976 at 19-20].

Members of Congress, including those who had supported the Act,

repeated similar criticisms of OSHA's 6(a) standards. For example,

Congressman Steiger, quoting a constituent [117 Cong. Rec. 10839 (daily

ed. March 29, 1971)], commented: ``Perhaps large corporations have

engineers who have the savvy to comprehend the 744 columns (of

standards published in the Federal Register). Few businesses have.''

He also complained [120 Cong. Rec. 21654 (daily ed. June 27,

1974)]:

For the small businessman without an attorney on retainer, or

safety and health professional on their staff, the standards

published in the Federal Register might as well be written in a

foreign language.

Another Member of Congress, Mr. McKinney, noted that an employer

needs ``an interpreter to decipher the OSHA regulations'' [120 Cong.

Rec. 21654 (daily ed. June 27, 1974)]. Congressman Hungate complained

that OSHA's regulations are voluminous, technical and complex, and that

small businesses do not have the resources to daily monitor the Federal

Register or hire engineers to interpret the technical language

contained in the regulations [Id. P. 21658].

Additionally, Congressman Anderson [121 Cong. Rec. 36908 (daily ed.

Nov. 17, 1975] stated:

If OSHA can be faulted for anything, it is that it tends to be

too bureaucratic and gets carried away with drawing up regulations

that are so laden with gobbledy-gook that even an FBI cryptographer

would have difficulty decoding them. Pity then the poor small

businessman who had not been tutored in reading gobbledy-gook and

who cannot afford to hire a translator or special consultant to

assist him in interpreting and implementing these standards.

The Clinton Administration's initiative to reinvent government,

spearheaded by Vice President Gore, has focused renewed attention on

the difficulty many employers and employees have in understanding OSHA

requirements. Responding to President Clinton and Vice President Gore's

challenge, in June 1995, the Department of Labor developed a complete

regulatory reform strategy to ``emphasize plain language to make rules

more user-friendly.''

This proposal begins the implementation of OSHA's goal of

identifying at least three standards that can be rewritten in plain

English. Means of Egress (Exit Routes) which is codified as Subpart E

of OSHA's General Industry Standards (29 CFR 1910), was selected as the

first plain English project because these rules were not

technologically complex and their purpose--to protect employees in case

of fire or other emergencies--was familiar.

Two alternate approaches to plain English rule writing are

presented in this proposal. In redrafting other Section 6(a) standards,

many of which are technologically more complex or more detailed than

Subpart E, it may not be possible for OSHA to achieve the simplicity

and user-friendliness of the proposed revisions to Subpart E.

III. What are OSHA's Goals in Revising Subpart E?

OSHA hopes to achieve three goals in this proposal:

To maintain the safety and health protections provided to

employees by Subpart E without increasing the regulatory burden on

employers

To create a regulation that is easily understood

To state employers obligations in performance-oriented

language to the extent possible.

Below, OSHA describes how each of these goals is served by the

proposed revisions to Subpart E.

This project is a language revision project, not an effort to

substantively revise OSHA's means of egress standards. Therefore, the

Agency has been careful to ensure that the protections afforded to

employees by Subpart E are not weakened in the revision process.

Employers who were in compliance with Subpart E prior to this proposal

will continue to be in compliance with the new regulation after it

becomes effective. Likewise, employees who are accustomed to relying on

these OSHA requirements to ensure safe exit from the workplace during

an emergency can continue to rely on those requirements with

confidence.

OSHA's effort to redraft Subpart E in plain English has included a

thorough, comprehensive review of the existing regulation. The Agency

has reviewed all relevant OSHA interpretations of Subpart E and

decisions of the Federal courts and the Occupational Safety and Health

Review Commission to determine what each provision of Subpart E has

meant in practice. OSHA has also reviewed comparable State regulations,

existing training materials on means of egress, and current consensus

standards, including the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)

Life Safety Code. This comprehensive analysis of Subpart E has enabled

OSHA to reorganize Subpart E, and eliminate duplicate provisions and

have confidence that the revisions will not diminish the safety and

health protections provided by the existing rules.

During the revision process, OSHA has become aware that some

provisions of Subpart E are outdated. Indeed, the current NFPA Life

Safety Code and other consensus standards provide employers with

contemporary fire safety compliance options that are not permitted by

the existing rules. Where it was possible to revise the proposed

language of Subpart E to allow employers the flexibility of relying on

these more contemporary compliance approaches without decreasing the

protectiveness of the requirements or increasing employers'

obligations, OSHA has proposed to do so. For example, OSHA's existing

rules require that exits lead directly outside, while recent revisions

to NFPA's code permit exit routes that lead to a refuge area,

particularly in high-rise buildings. The proposed revisions would

recognize refuge areas as a permissible means of exit; OSHA is

specifically asking for comment on this change. Another example of the

increased flexibility of the of the proposed revisions relates to exit

signs. Self-luminous or electroluminescent signs are now a commonplace

method of alerting occupants to the location of exits in the workplace

and are recognized by consensus organizations as appropriate for that

purpose. Existing Subpart E, however, does not yet permit reliance on

self-luminous or electroluminescent signs. The proposed revisions,

however,

[[Page 47714]]

would permit employers to utilize such signs as an added option;

current compliance methods would also continue to be permitted. In this

way, OSHA has increased the flexibility of compliance for employers

without reducing the safety and health protections provided to

employees.

Another of OSHA's aims in revising Subpart E is to continue to rely

on performance-oriented language to the extent that doing so is

consistent with the maintenance of safety and health protections and

does not increase the obligations of employers.

For example, the specification that exit signs use letters that are

not less than six inches high and 3/4 inches wide was intended to

ensure that any sign used to direct employees out of the building would

be visible. In the proposed revision, OSHA has eliminated the size

specification in favor of a requirement that simply states that exit

signs must be clearly visible to all building occupants.

In addition, the proposed revisions to Subpart E increase the

performance orientation and compliance flexibility of the standards

where national consensus standards have led the way (without, of

course, reducing employee protections). For example, Sec. 1910.37(c)

contains detailed specifications for the number of persons per unit of

exit width required for each means of egress. These specifications are

extremely difficult for users to understand. The NFPA no longer relies

on the number of persons per unit of exit width to determine adequate

exit capacity. Instead, the NFPA's Life Safety Code incorporates the

concept of exit geometry. Exit capacity, according to the NFPA, is

determined not by width alone, but by considering the distance to be

traveled to the exit and other factors affecting the flow of people out

of the workplace. The performance-oriented language of the proposed

regulations allows employers to consider the newer NFPA approach.

However, OSHA has not used performance-oriented language in

revising Subpart E where the effect of doing so would:

Eliminate a requirement that protects employee safety and

health without substituting an equally effective requirement; or

Expand an employer's compliance obligations.

For example, Sec. 1910.37 now requires that a means of egress be at

least 28 inches wide. Substituting a performance-oriented criterion,

such as a requirement that a means of egress be ``of adequate width to

support building occupants'', would eliminate the minimum width but

might also reduce the protection provided to those seeking to leave the

workplace. For this reason, OSHA decided not to revise the minimum

clearance requirement.

For some employers, reliance on performance-oriented regulations

may create confusion as to the specific precautions necessary in a

variety of situations. In the past, OSHA has used the NFPA Life Safety

Code as an aid in interpreting Subpart E. OSHA intends to continue to

rely on the NFPA Life Safety Code and other consensus standards as

guidance in implementing performance-oriented requirements of revised

Subpart E.

III. What Are the Results of OSHA's Revision to Subpart E?

The proposed revision to Subpart E has resulted in changes to the

paragraph designations of existing requirements. The following table

compares the proposed rule paragraph designations with the paragraph

designations of the current Subpart E requirements.

Comparison of Proposed Rule on Exit Routes With Current Subpart E

Standard

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

Comparable Subpart E

Proposed rule on exit routes section

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

1910.35. What is covered by these 1910.36(a).

regulations?.

(b) Exits and Exits Routes Are Covered. 1910.35(c)

(1) Definition Of An Exit.

(2) Definition Of An Exit Route.... 1910.35(a).

1910.36. What are the design requirements 1910.37(a), 1910.37(g)(4).

for exit routes?.

(a) An Exit Must Be Permanent.

(b) The Number Of Exit Routes Must Be 1910.36(b)(1)

Adequate.

(1) Two exit routes, remote from 1910.36(b)(3)

one another, must be available to

provide alternate means for

employees to leave the workplace

safely during an emergency.

(2) A single exit route is 1910.36(b)(8).

permitted where the number of

employees, the size of the

building, its occupancy, or the

arrangement of the workplace

indicate that a single exit will

allow all employees to exit safely

during an emergency. Other means

of escape, such as fire exits or

accessible windows, should be

available where fewer than two

exit routes are provided.

(3) More than two exit routes must 1910.37(e).

be available to allow employees to

leave the workplace safely during

an emergency where the number of

employees, the size of the

building, its occupancy, or the

arrangement of the workplace

reasonably suggest that reliance

on two exit routes could endanger

employees.

(c) An Exit Has Limited Openings....... 1910.37(a), 1910.37(b)(3),

1910.37(b)(4).

(d) An Exit Must Be Separated By Fire 1910.37(b)(1)-(b)(2).

Resistant Materials.

(e) Exit Route Access Must Be 1910.36(b)(4),

Unobstructed. 1910.36(d)(1).

(1) Free and unobstructed access to 1910.37(f)(1),

each exit route must be provided 1910.37(k)(2).

to ensure safe exit during an

emergency.

(2) The exit route must be free of 1910.36(d)(1),

material or equipment. 1910.37(f)(1).

(3) Employees must not be required 1910.37(f)(3).

to travel through a room which can

be locked, such as a bathroom, or

toward a dead end to reach an exit.

(4) Stairs or a ramp must be used 1910.37(j).

if the exit route is not

substantially level.

(f) An Exit Must Lead Outside.......... 1910.37(h)(1).

(1) An exit must lead directly New Compliance Option

outside or to a street, walkway, Included.

refuge area, or to an open space

with access to the outside.

[[Page 47715]]

(2) The street, walkway, refuge

area, or open space to which an

exit leads must be large enough to

accommodate all building occupants

likely to use that exit.

(3) A refuge area must be:

(i) a space along an exit route

protected from the effects of

fire either by separation from

other spaces within the

building or by its location;

or

(ii) a floor with at least two

spaces separated by smoke-

resistant partitions in a

building where each floor is

protected by an automatic

sprinkler system. An automatic

sprinkler system must comply

with 29 CFR Sec. 1910.159.

(4) Exit stairs that continue 1910.37(h)(2).

beyond the floor of exit discharge

must be interrupted by doors,

partitions, or other effective

means.

(g) An Exit Door Must Be Unlocked...... 1910.36(b)(4),

1910.37(k)(3).

(h) A Side-hinged Exit Door Must Be 1910.37(f)(2).

Used.

(i) The Capacity Of An Exit Route Must 1910.37(c), 1910.37(d).

Be Adequate.

(j) An Exit Must Meet Minimum Height 1910.37(f)(6), 1910.37(i).

And Width Requirements.

(k) An Outdoor Exit Route Is Permitted. 1910.37(g)(1)-(g)(5).

1910.37. What are the operation and

maintenance requirements for exit routes?

(a) The Danger To Employees Must Be

Minimized.

(1) The exit route must be

maintained to minimize danger to

employees during an emergency.

(2) The exit route must be free of 1910.36(b)(2).

explosive or highly flammable

furnishings or decorations.

(3) An exit route must not require 1910.37(l)(2),

employees to travel toward 1910.37(f)(5).

materials which burn very quickly,

emit poisonous fumes, or are

explosive, unless those materials

are effectively shielded from the

exit route.

(b) Lighting Must Be Adequate.......... 1910.36(b)(6).

(c) An Exit Must Be Marked 1910.37(f)(4).

Appropriately.

(1) Each exit must be clearly 1910.36(b)(5),

visible and must be marked by a 1910.37(q)(1); (q)(3);

distinctive sign reading ``Exit''. (q)(4); (q)(8).

(2) An exit door must be free of 1910.37(f)(4).

signs or decorations that obscure

its visibility.

(3) Signs must be posted along the 1910.36(b)(5);

exit route indicating the 1910.37(q)(5).

direction of travel to the nearest

exit.

(4) The line-of-sight to an exit

sign must be uninterrupted.

(5) Any doorway or passage that 1910.37(f)(4);

might be mistaken for an exit must 1910.37(q)(3).

be marked ``Not an Exit'' or with

an indication of its actual use.

(6) An exit sign must be 1910.36(b)(5);

illuminated to a surface value of 1910.37(q)(2),

at least 5 foot candles by a 1910.37(q)(6)-(q)(7).

reliable light source and must New Compliance Option

show a designated color. Self- Included.

luminous or electroluminescent

signs have a minimum luminance

surface value of .06 footlamberts.

(d) The Fire Retardant Properties Of 1910.37(o).

Paints Or Other Coatings Must Be

Maintained.

(e) Each Emergency Safeguard Must Be 1910.37(m)-(n),

Maintained. 1910.38(b)(5).

(f) Exits Must Be Maintained During 1910.36(c)(1)-(c)(3).

Construction And Repair.

(g) An Employee Alarm System Must Be 1910.36(b)(7), 1910.37(n).

Operable.

1910.38. What are the requirements for an 1910.38(a)(1),

Emergency Action Plan?. 1910.38(a)(5)(iii).

(a) An Emergency Action Plan Must Be

Available for Employee Review.

(b) Minimum Elements Of An Emergency 1910.38(a)(2),

Action Plan. 1910.38(a)(4).

(c) Employee Alarm System.............. 1910.38(a)(3).

(d) Training........................... 1910.38(a)(5)(i).

(e) Employee Review.................... 1910.38(a)(5)(ii),

1910.38(a)(5)(iii).

1910.39. What are the requirements for a

Fire Prevention Plan?

(a) A Fire Prevention Plan Must Be 1910.38(b)(1),

Available For Employee Review. 1910.38(b)(4).

(b) Minimum Elements Of A Fire 1910.38(b)(2).

Prevention Plan.

(c) Employee Information............... 1910.38(b)(4).

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

In revising the means of egress standards, OSHA has attempted to

organize their requirements in a logical and understandable manner.

OSHA has drafted this revision with the following general principles in

mind:

General provisions should appear before specific

provisions or exceptions

Important provisions should appear before less important

provisions

Frequently used provisions should appear before less

frequently used provisions

Substantive requirements should appear before procedural

requirements

Permanent provisions should appear before temporary,

transitional, or ``grandfather'' provisions

``Housekeeping'' provisions and appendices should be

placed at the end of the requirements.

OSHA has grouped the requirements around three common themes: (1)

design and construction requirements for exit routes; (2) operation and

maintenance requirements for exit routes; and (3) requirements for

warning employees of the need to escape. For example, the design

requirements for exit routes formerly were scattered both in

Sec. 1910.36 and Sec. 1910.37. Previously, the requirement that exits

discharge directly to a public street or to an open space was a general

requirement found in Sec. 1910.37(h)(1). Because the placement or

location of exits is a requirement employers must address during

workplace design, that requirement has been moved to paragraph (f) of

Sec. 1910.36, which covers design of exit routes.

Reorganizing Subpart E in this manner has enabled OSHA to eliminate

many duplicate provisions. In the prior version, both

Sec. 1910.36(b)(8) and Sec. 1910.37(e) contained the design requirement

that workplaces with more than one exit have two means of egress remote

from one another. Now, however, Sec. 1910.36(b) contains all

requirements for the location of exit routes.

Throughout this revision, OSHA has placed the general provisions of

each paragraph first, followed by any specific applications or

exceptions. For example,

[[Page 47716]]

there is a proposed general design requirement (Sec. 1910.36(b)(1))

that requires employers to have two exit routes, remote from one

another. Two specific exceptions follow that general requirement:

single exit routes are permitted in certain circumstances if safe

employee exit is possible; and more than two exit routes are required

where workplace conditions suggest that reliance on only two exit

routes will endanger employees (Sec. 1910.36(b)(2)-(3)).

Since OSHA regulates employment and places of employment, the

Agency's standards are intended to impose those duties on employers

that are necessary to protect employee safety and health. In the

revised standards, the mandatory duty of employers to comply with the

regulatory obligations set forth in Subpart E is retained. However,

existing Subpart E too often addresses obligations that are not related

to employee protection but pertain instead to protection of the general

public or the occupants of buildings. The proposed revision limits the

regulatory obligations to those relevant to workplace health and

safety; buildings that are not workplaces are clearly outside the scope

of the revised standards. There is an exception to this principle where

the protection of employee safety and health requires an employer to

assure that all building occupants, including employees, can evacuate a

building safely. In such situations, revised Subpart E imposes a duty

on employers to protect all building occupants. However, where the

safety of building occupants is independent of employee safety, the

revised language refers only to the protection of employees.

OSHA has revised Subpart E to state clearly that employers must

comply with its requirements and indicate how compliance must be

achieved. OSHA has continued the use of command words, such as

``must,'' when the intent is to impose clear obligations on employers

to take affirmative employee-protective steps. Thus, OSHA has avoided

the use of such words as ``should'', which recommend but do not require

a given action, or ``may'' which give the employer discretion to act

unless the Agency is recommending or permitting the associated action.

The Agency believes that the proposed revisions make Subpart E more

``user-friendly'' and less easy to misinterpret. OSHA has reduced the

level of subunits (subparagraphs or sub-subparagraphs) to make the

requirements easier to locate and follow.

The proposed Question and Answer version of Subpart E is very

different from the approach taken in current OSHA standards. Each

provision is written in the form in which a typical employer might ask

a question about the rule, and this question is then followed by an

answer that tells the employer about the applicable requirements. For

example, employers frequently ask, ``What are the requirements for

Emergency Action Plans?'' This question, now posed in Sec. 1910.38, is

followed by the answer, which consists of a description of the specific

requirements for emergency action plans an employer must follow to

comply with Subpart E.

Each provision of the proposed revision is preceded by a section

heading that tells the reader what information can be found in that

section. For example, the section heading for exterior exit routes is

``An Outdoor Exit Route is Permitted.'' These descriptive headings help

the user to locate relevant regulatory requirements. Using these

section headings, OSHA has created a table of contents that precedes

the proposed revisions. Focus groups evaluating the format of OSHA

standards strongly recommended the addition of a table of contents as a

guide to OSHA standards.

In keeping with OSHA's new ``user-friendly'' approach to drafting

standards, the number of definitions also has been reduced from ten to

two; all unused terms have been removed from the existing definitions.

Because employers do not need definitions for ordinary words that are

employed in a manner consistent with common usage, OSHA believes this

revision will streamline the requirements and eliminate confusion. OSHA

also has eliminated many cross-references to other standards so that

most requirements for exit routes in general industry will now be found

in Subpart E.

OSHA has incorporated plain English principles in this revision.

Generally, OSHA has tried to use short, focused, sentences to keep the

requirements simple. OSHA believes that a readable sentence is

affirmative, declarative, and limited to a single idea or thought.

Accordingly, qualifying phrases longer than a few words have been moved

to separate sentences. OSHA also believes that paragraphs should be

brief and be devoted to a single, unified topic.

Unnecessary technical language obscures meaning and impairs

understanding. In this revision, OSHA has tried to use common words in

ways that are consistent with their ordinary or accepted meaning. For

example, Subpart E regulates ``means of egress,'' a term understood by

professionals but not used in everyday conversation. Substituting the

phrase ``exit route'' for ``means of egress'' will make it easier for

most employers and employees to understand the requirements at first

reading.

OSHA has used the active rather than the passive voice in this

revision. In an active sentence, the subject performs an action. In a

passive sentence, the subject is acted upon. Writers frequently use

passive construction to emphasize the action instead of the actor,

e.g., ``The regulation was drafted,'' instead of ``He drafted the

regulation.'' Passive construction is less immediate and can be less

compelling to the reader, as well as more ambiguous. For example,

instead of ``it is required that an employer * * *'', OSHA now

generally uses ``The employer must * * *''.

A positive sentence is preferred when an idea can be expressed

either positively or negatively, although a negative sentence is an

obvious choice when the subject of a standard is a prohibition, e.g.,

``No employee is permitted * * *'' Consistent with the goals of this

revision, OSHA has stated requirements affirmatively, rather than

negatively. For example, instead of stating ``no furnishing,

decorations, or other objects shall be so placed as to obstruct exits,

access hereto, egress therefrom, or visibility thereof,'' the revised

language would read, ``the escape route be free of material and

equipment.''

In drafting simpler sentences, OSHA has paired the actor (employer)

with the action (conduct required or prohibited). Concise declarative

sentences answer the question, ``Who must do what?'' In most situations

covered by OSHA standards, the actor will be the employer. The proposed

traditional version of Subpart E includes an introductory requirement

that the employer comply with each of the requirements imposed by that

section. Each section of the regulation then clearly identifies the

conduct required or prohibited.

In the proposed question and answer revision of Subpart E, the

actor and action are paired more closely. Since confusion might occur

if conditions pertaining to the requirement or prohibition were

inserted between the actor and the action, OSHA has placed the actor,

action, and object close together in the sentence. For example,

Sec. 1910.37 of the proposed standard now requires that an employer

comply with each duty described in that section, and paragraph (b)

describes the required conduct. This proposed requirement now states,

``Each exit route must be illuminated adequately.'' Thus, the

employer's obligation is clearly

[[Page 47717]]

identified. Previously, the same requirement (Sec. 1910.37(b)(6))

stated, ``In every building or structure equipped for artificial

illumination, adequate and reliable illumination shall be provided for

all exit facilities.''

Finally, OSHA has paid careful attention to parallel structure and

to the rules of grammar and punctuation in revising Subpart E.

IV. What Procedures Govern OSHA's Plain English Revision?

This proceeding to revise Subpart E differs from other OSHA

rulemaking efforts because the Agency is proposing to modify only the

language of the Means of Egress rule and not its substance. In the

past, OSHA has waived public notice and comment when a rule contains

``minor and non-controversial'' changes. However, OSHA has decided

against that approach in this rulemaking process in order to give

public notice, and receive comments, about the Agency's revision of its

standards into plain English.

The Agency expects to receive three types of public comments:

Comments from interested parties on whether they perceive

the two revised, plain English versions of Subpart E as providing

levels of safety and health protection that are as effective as those

currently in force. Where interested parties identify provisions of the

proposed plain English rules that do not meet this criterion, OSHA

expects to make changes to ensure that the final rule meets the

Agency's goal of imposing no new burdens on employers and maintaining

safety and health protections for employees.

Comments by interested parties on their preference for the

``traditional'' plain English version of Subpart E or the ``question

and answer'' version of Subpart E.

Comments from interested parties identifying sections of

Subpart E that are out-of-date and explaining why OSHA should

substantively modify these provisions. OSHA will take such comments

into consideration in setting its standard-setting priorities.

Because of the limited scope and purpose of this rulemaking, OSHA

hopes to expedite the issuance of a final standard.

If the Agency receives significant objections to its proposal or,

in the unlikely event that issues are raised that have not been fully

considered in developing the proposed revision, OSHA will provide

public notice of this fact and proceed with further rulemaking under

section 6(b) of the Act.

V. What Legal Considerations Govern OSHA's Plain English Revisions?

OSHA does not believe that the significant risk analysis that the

Agency usually performs prior to proposing a safety standard is

necessary here. In Industrial Union Department v. American Petroleum

Institute, 448 U.S. 607 (1980), the Supreme Court ruled that section

3(8) of the Act, which defines an occupational safety and health

standard, requires the Agency, as a threshold matter, to determine

whether the hazard it proposes to regulate poses a significant risk in

the workplace and that a new, lower standard is ``reasonably necessary

and appropriate'' to reduce the risk posed to workers. OSHA believes

that an analysis of significant risk is not required here and, indeed,

would not be helpful because the Agency is proposing no substantive

revisions to the requirements of Subpart E. Because this proposal

neither imposes new regulatory burdens nor impacts safety and health

protection, any effort to measure the ``benefits'' of this effort would

not be productive.

This does not mean that the Agency believes that this effort will

not yield substantial benefits. To the contrary, rules written in plain

English are easier for employers and employees to follow and

understand. Ease of understanding should facilitate compliance by

employers. With OSHA's limited resources, any effort that can

substantially increase opportunities for compliance without sacrificing

employee safety and health protection will have long-term benefits.

OSHA also believes that this proceeding neither requires

technological changes nor imposes increased compliance costs on

employers. Indeed, employers may save money. Therefore, OSHA does not

believe an analysis of the economic or technological feasibility of the

proposal is necessary. See American Textile Mfrs. Inst. v. Donovan, 452

U.S. 490 (1981). Likewise, Executive Order 12866 does not require that

OSHA prepare an Economic Analysis for this rulemaking.

Finally, OSHA does not believe that section 6(b)(8) applies to this

proceeding. Section 6(b)(8) requires OSHA to provide an explanation

when a rule differs substantially from an existing national consensus

standard. OSHA does not view the revisions to Subpart E as differing

from the provisions of the national consensus standard, because the

agency is modifying the wording of Subpart E and not its substance.

Therefore, the requirements imposed by Subpart E will remain comparable

to those imposed by the national consensus standard upon which Subpart

E was based. Furthermore, OSHA has evaluated current consensus

standards addressing means of egress and has concluded that the

requirements of Subpart E are consistent with those of these national

consensus standards.

The current requirements contained in Sec. 1910.38 address both

employee action plans (Sec. 1910.38(a)) and fire prevention plans

(Sec. 1910.38(b)). OSHA is proposing that Sec. 1910.38 continue to

contain requirements for emergency action plans, but that a new

section, Sec. 1910.39 contain requirements for fire prevention plans.

Therefore, OSHA is proposing that the appendix to Subpart E be revised

to reflect the new section designation for fire prevention plans. The

Agency, however, is not proposing any changes to the text of the

Subpart E appendix.

Summary of Economic Impact Analysis and Certification of No

Significant Impact

Because the proposed rule for Means of Egress (proposed to be

renamed ``Exit Routes'') will impose no obligations on employers beyond

those imposed by the existing rule, which has been in effect since

1971, OSHA has not conducted a preliminary economic analysis to

accompany the proposed rule. Because the proposed rule will have no

economic impacts, the Agency certifies that it will have no significant

impacts on a substantial number of small entities. This certification

is necessitated by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended, 1996).

Public Participation

Interested parties are invited to submit written data, views, and

comments with respect to this proposed revision. These comments must be

postmarked on or before November 12, 1996. Comments are to be submitted

in quadruplicate, or in 1 original (hard copy) and 1 disk (3\1/2\'' or

5\1/4\'') in WordPerfect 5.0, 5.1, or 6.0, or ASCII, to the Docket

Office, Docket No. S-052, Room N2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200

Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, DC. 20210.

All written comments, views, data, and arguments received within

the specified comment period will be made part of the record and will

be available for public inspection and copying at the above Docket

Office address.

Requests for an informal public hearing on objections to the

proposed rule, pursuant to Sec. 6(b)(3) of the Occupational Safety and

Health Act (29 U.S.C. 655(b)(3)), must be submitted to

[[Page 47718]]

the Docket Office at the above address, and postmarked no later than

November 12, 1996. Hearing requests must comply with the following

requirements: they must include the name and address of the objector;

they must specify with particularity the provision of the proposed rule

to which the objection is taken, and must state the grounds therefore;

and they must be accompanied by a summary of the evidence proposed to

be adduced at the requested hearing.

State Plan States

The 25 States and Territories with their own OSHA-approved

occupational safety and health plans must revise their existing

standard within six months of the publication date of the final

standard or show OSHA why there is no need for action, e.g., because an

existing State standard covering this area is already ``at least as

effective'' as the revised Federal standard. These States are: Alaska,

Arizona, California, Connecticut (State and local government employees

only), Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota,

Nevada, New Mexico, New York (State and local government employees

only), North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee,

Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Virgin Islands, Washington, and Wyoming.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910

Means of egress, Exit, Exit route, Emergency action plan, Fire

prevention plan, Occupational safety and health.

Authority

This document was prepared under the authority of Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC

20210.

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 4, 6, 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, it is hereby

proposed to amend 29 CFR Part 1910 as set forth below.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 4th day of September 1996.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

29 CFR Part 1910 would be amended as follows:

PART 1910--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS

1. The Authority citation for Subpart E of 29 CFR Part 1910 would

continue to read as follows:

Authority: Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the 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.

2. Subpart E--Means of Egress would be amended by revising

Secs. 1910.35 through 1910.39 as follows [traditional text version]:

Subpart E--Exit Routes

Sec. 1910.35. Coverage.

(a) Every Employer Is Covered. This subpart requires a general

industry employer to provide exit routes for employees to leave the

workplace safely during emergencies. This subpart does not apply to

mobile workplaces, such as vehicles or vessels.

(b) Exits and Exit Routes Are Covered. (1) Definition Of An Exit.

The term ``exit'' refers to that portion of the exit route that

generally is separated from other areas to provide a protected way of

travel out of the workplace.

(2) Definition Of An Exit Route. The term ``exit route'' means a

continuous and unobstructed path of exit travel from any point within a

workplace to safety outside. An exit route generally consists of three

parts: access to the exit; the exit, which provides a way of travel out

of the workplace; and the way from the exit to the outside. An exit

route includes all vertical and horizontal areas.

Sec. 1910.36. Design requirements for exit routes.

(a) An Exit Must Be Permanent. Each exit must be a permanent part

of the workplace.

(b) The Number Of Exit Routes Must Be Adequate. (1) At least two

exit routes, remote from one another, must be available to provide

alternate means for employees to leave the workplace safely during an

emergency.

(2) A single exit route is permitted where the number of employees,

the size of the building, its occupancy, or the arrangement of the

workplace indicates that a single exit will allow all employees to exit

safely during an emergency. Other means of escape, such as fire escapes

or accessible windows, should be available where only one exit route is

provided.

(3) More than two exit routes must be available to allow employees

to leave the workplace safely during an emergency where the number of

employees, the size of the building, its occupancy, or the arrangement

of the workplace reasonably suggests that reliance on two exit routes

could endanger employees.

(c) Openings Into An Exit Must Be Limited. An exit must have only

those openings necessary to permit access to, or exit from, occupied

areas of the workplace. An opening into an exit must be protected by a

self-closing fire door that remains closed. Each fire door, its frame,

and its hardware must be listed or approved by a nationally recognized

testing laboratory.

Note to paragraph (c): 29 CFR 1910.155(c)(3)(iv)(A) defines

``listed'', 29 CFR Sec. 1910.7 defines a ``nationally recognized

testing laboratory.'', and 29 CFR Sec. 1910.155 (c)(3) defines

``approved.''

(d) An Exit Must Be Separated By Fire Resistant Materials.

Construction materials used to separate an exit must have at least a 1-

hour fire resistance rating if the exit connects three stories or less.

Construction materials used to separate an exit must have at least a 2-

hour fire resistance rating if the exit connects 4 stories or more.

(e) Exit Route Access Must Be Unobstructed. (1) Free and

unobstructed access to each exit route must be provided to ensure safe

exit during an emergency.

(2) The exit route must be free of material or equipment.

(3) Employees must not be required to travel through a room that

can be locked, such as a bathroom, or toward a dead end to reach an

exit.

(4) Stairs or a ramp must be used if the exit route is not

substantially level.

(f) An Exit Must Lead Outside. (1) An exit must lead directly

outside or to a street, walkway, refuge area, or to an open space with

access to the outside.

(2) The street, walkway, refuge area, or open space to which an

exit leads must be large enough to accommodate all building occupants

likely to use that exit.

(3) A refuge area must be:

(i) a space along an exit route protected from the effects of fire

either by separation from other spaces within the building or by its

location; or

(ii) a floor with at least two spaces separated by smoke-resistant

partitions, in a building where each floor is protected by an automatic

sprinkler system. Automatic sprinkler systems must comply with 29 CFR

1910.159.

(4) Exit stairs that continue beyond the floor of exit discharge

must be interrupted by doors, partitions, or other effective means at

the floor of exit discharge to assure that the direction of exit travel

is clear to employees.

(g) An Exit Door Must Be Unlocked. An exit door must be able to be

readily opened from the inside without keys, tools, or special

knowledge. A device that locks only from the outside, such as

[[Page 47719]]

a panic bar, is permitted. An exit door must be free of any device or

alarm, which, if it fails, could restrict emergency use of an exit.

Note to paragraph (g): An exit door may be locked or blocked

from the inside in a mental, penal, or correctional institution, if

supervisory personnel are continuously on duty and a plan exists to

remove occupants during an emergency.

(h) A Side-Hinged Exit Door Must Be Used. A side-hinged exit door

must be used to connect any room to an exit route. A door that connects

any room to an exit route must swing out if the room may be occupied by

more than 50 persons or highly flammable or explosive materials may be

located inside.

(i) The Capacity Of An Exit Route Must Be Adequate. Each exit route

must support the maximum-permitted occupant load for each floor served

by the exit route. The capacity of an exit must not decrease with the

direction of exit travel.

(j) An Exit Must Meet Minimum Height And Width Requirements.

(1) The exit route must be at least 6 feet, 8 inches high at all

points.

(2) An exit route must be at least 28 inches wide at all points

between handrails. An exit route must be wider than 28 inches if

necessary to accommodate the expected occupant load.

(3) Objects that project into the exit route must not reduce the

minimum height and width of the exit route.

(k) An Outdoor Exit Route Is Permitted. (1) An outdoor exit route

is permitted if it meets the requirements for an indoor exit route and

the following additional requirements:

(i) the exit route must have guardrails to protect unenclosed

sides;

(ii) the exit route must be covered if accumulation of snow or ice

is likely and is not removed regularly;

(iii) the exit route must be reasonably straight with smooth,

solid, substantially level floors; and

(iv) the exit route must have no dead ends longer than 20 feet.

Sec. 1910.37. Operation And Maintenance Requirements For Exit Routes.

(a) The Danger To Employees Must Be Minimized.

(1) Each exit route must be maintained to minimize danger to

employees during an emergency.

(2) Each exit route must be free of explosive or highly flammable

furnishings and decorations.

(3) An exit route must not require employees to travel toward

materials that burn very quickly, emit poisonous fumes, or are

explosive, unless those materials are effectively shielded from the

exit route.

(b) Lighting Must Be Adequate. Each exit route must be illuminated

adequately.

(c) An Exit Must Be Marked Appropriately. (1) Each exit must be

clearly visible and must be marked by a distinctive sign reading

``Exit.''

(2) An exit door must be free of signs or decorations that obscure

its visibility.

(3) Signs must be posted along the exit route indicating the

direction of travel to the nearest exit.

(4) The line-of-sight to an exit sign must be uninterrupted.

(5) Any doorway or passage that might be mistaken for an exit must

be marked ``Not an Exit'' or with an indication of its actual use.

(6) An exit sign must be illuminated to a surface value of at least

5 foot candles by a reliable light source and must show a designated

color. Self-luminous or electroluminescent signs must have a minimum

luminance surface value of .06 footlamberts.

(d) The Fire Retardant Properties Of Paints Or Other Coatings Must

Be Maintained. The fire retardant properties of paints or other

coatings used in the workplace must be maintained.

(e) Each Emergency Safeguard Must Be Maintained. Each safeguard to

protect employees during an emergency (e.g., sprinkler systems, alarm

systems, fire doors, exit lighting) must be maintained in proper

working order.

(f) Exits Must Be Maintained During Construction And Repair.

(1) Employees must not occupy a workplace under construction until

an adequate number of exit routes that complies with these rules is

available for the portion of the workplace to be occupied.

(2) Employees must not occupy a workplace during repair or

alteration unless all exits and existing fire protection are maintained

or alternate fire protection is provided that ensures an equivalent

level of safety.

(3) Flammable or explosive materials used during construction or

repair must not expose employees to hazards not otherwise present in

the workplace or impede emergency escape from the workplace.

(g) An Employee Alarm System Must Be Operable. An operable employee

alarm system with a distinctive signal to warn employees of fire or

other emergencies must be installed and maintained, unless employees

can see or smell a fire or other hazard so that it would provide

adequate warning to them. The employee alarm system must comply with

the requirements of 29 CFR Sec. 1910.165.

Sec. 1910.38. Requirements for an Emergency Action Plan.

(a) Development of An Emergency Action Plan.

(1) Whenever another OSHA standard requires an employer to develop

an emergency action plan, the plan must comply with this section and

cover each part of the workplace.

(2) The plan must be in writing, be kept in the workplace, and be

made available to employees on request, except that

(3) An employer with 10 or fewer employees in a workplace may

communicate the plan orally to employees rather than develop a written

plan.

(b) Minimum Elements Of An Emergency Action Plan. An emergency

action plan must include:

(1) Procedures for emergency evacuation, including type of

evacuation and exit route assignments;

(2) Procedures to account for all employees after evacuation;

(3) Procedures for reporting a fire or other emergency;

(4) Procedures to follow for emergency operation or shut down of

critical equipment before evacuation;

(5) Procedures to follow for rescue and medical duties; and,

(6) Names or job titles of employees to be contacted to get more

information about the duties of employees under the plan.

(c) Employee Alarm System. The employer must install and maintain

an employee alarm system. The alarm system must use a distinctive

signal for each purpose and comply with 29 CFR Sec. 1910.165.

(d) Training. An employer must designate employees to assist in the

safe emergency evacuation of other employees. An employer must ensure

that the designated employees receive training in emergency evacuation

procedures.

(e) Employee Review. An employer must review the emergency action

plan with each employee covered by the plan:

(1) When the plan is developed or the employee is assigned

initially to the job;

(2) When the employee's responsibilities under the plan change;

and,

(3) When the plan is changed.

Sec. 1910.39. Requirements for a fire prevention plan.

(a) Development of A Fire Prevention Plan. (1) Whenever another

OSHA standard requires an employer to

[[Page 47720]]

develop a fire prevention plan, the plan must comply with this section

and cover each part of the workplace.

(2) The plan must be in writing, be kept in the workplace, and be

made available to employees on request; except that

(3) An employer with 10 or fewer employees in the workplace may

communicate the plan orally to employees rather than develop a written

plan.

(b) Minimum Elements Of A Fire Prevention Plan. A fire prevention

plan must include:

(1) A list of all major fire hazards, including proper handling and

storage procedures for hazardous materials, potential ignition sources

and their control, and the type of fire protection equipment necessary

to control each major hazard;

(2) Procedures to control accumulations of flammable and

combustible waste materials;

(3) Procedures for regular maintenance of safeguards installed on

heat producing equipment to prevent accidental ignition of combustible

materials;

(4) Names or job titles of employees responsible for maintaining

equipment to prevent or control sources of ignition or fires; and,

(5) Names or job titles of employees responsible for control of

fuel source hazards.

(c) Employee Information. The employer must:

(1) inform employees of the fire hazards to which they are exposed;

and

(2) review with each employee those parts of the fire prevention

plan necessary for self-protection upon initial assignment to a job.

3. Subpart E--Means of Egress would be amended by revising

Secs. 1910.35 through 1910.39 as follows [Question and Answer version]:

SUBPART E--EXIT ROUTES

Sec. 1910.35. Coverage.

(a) What is covered by these regulations? These regulations require

every general industry employer to provide exit routes that allow

employees to leave the workplace safely during an emergency. These

regulations do not apply to mobile workplaces, such as vehicles or

vessels.

(b) What is an exit? The term ``exit'' refers to the portion of an

exit route that is generally separated from other areas to provide a

protected way of travel out of the workplace.

(c) What is an exit route? The term ``exit route'' means a

continuous and unobstructed path of exit travel from any point within a

workplace to safety outside. An ``exit route'' generally consists of

three parts: access to the exit; the exit, which provides a way of

travel out of the workplace; and the way from the exit to the outside.

An ``exit route'' includes all vertical and horizontal areas along the

route.

Sec. 1910.36. The Design of Exit Routes.

(a) Must exits be a permanent part of the workplace? Yes, an

employer must ensure that each exit is a permanent part of the

workplace.

(b) How many exit routes must be available in the workplace? An

employer must ensure that at least two exit routes are available to

permit prompt escape during an emergency of all employees and other

building occupants. The exit routes must be as far away from one

another as is practicable so that if the route to one exit is blocked

by fire or smoke, employees may escape safely using the alternate exit

route. In many instances, more than two exit routes are necessary where

the number of employees, the size of the building, its occupancy, or

the arrangement of the workplace suggests that reliance on two exit

routes may endanger employees. A single exit route is permitted where

the number of employees, the size of the building, its occupancy, or

the arrangement of the workplace indicates that a single exit will

allow all employees to exit safely during an emergency. Other means of

escape, such as fire exits or accessible windows, should be available

where only one exit route is provided.

(c) What openings are permitted into an exit? An employer must

ensure that an exit has only those openings necessary to permit access

to, or exit from, occupied areas of the workplace. An opening into an

exit must be protected by a self-closing fire door that remains closed.

Each fire door, its frame, and its hardware must be listed or approved

by a nationally recognized testing laboratory.

Note to paragraph (c): 29 CFR Sec. 1910.155(c)(3)(iv)(A) defines

``listed'', 29 CFR Sec. 1910.7 defines a ``nationally recognized

testing laboratory.'', and 29 CFR Sec. 1910.155(c)(3) defines

``approved.''

(d) What types of material may be used in exit construction? An

employer must ensure that construction materials used to separate an

exit have at least a one-hour fire resistance rating if the exit

connects three stories or less. If the exit connects four stories or

more, the employer must ensure that construction materials used to

separate the exit have at least a two-hour fire resistance rating.

(e) What is required to ensure that employees have access to exit

routes during an emergency? An employer must ensure that there is free

and unobstructed access to each exit route to ensure safe exit from the

workplace during an emergency. No materials or equipment may be placed,

either permanently or temporarily, along the exit route. The employer

must ensure that, to reach an exit, no employee is required to travel

through a room which can be locked, such as a bathroom, or to a dead

end. Stairs or a ramp must be used if the exit route is not

substantially level.

(f) Where must exits discharge? An employer must ensure that each

exit leads directly outside to a street, walkway, refuge area, or open

space with access to the outside. The street, walkway, refuge area, or

open space to which an exit leads must be large enough to accommodate

all building occupants likely to use the exit. Exit stairs that

continue beyond the floor of exit discharge must be interrupted by

doors, partitions, or other effective means at the floor of exit

discharge to assure that the direction of exit travel is clear to

employees. For the purposes of this section, a refuge area is:

(1) a space along an exit route that is protected from the effects

of fire either by means of separation from other spaces within the

building or by its location; or

(2) a floor with at least two spaces separated from each other by

smoke-resistant partitions, in a building protected throughout by an

automatic sprinkler system that complies with 29 CFR 1910.159.

(g) Can exit doors be locked? An employer must ensure that an exit

door can be readily opened from the inside without keys, tools, or

special knowledge. A device that locks only from the outside, such as a

panic bar, is permitted. An employer must ensure that the exit door is

free of any device or alarm which, if it fails, could restrict

emergency use of an exit. An exit door may be locked from the inside in

mental, penal, or correction facilities only if supervisory personnel

are continuously on duty and a plan exists to remove occupants from the

facility during an emergency.

(h) What are the requirements for exit doors? An employer must

ensure that a side-hinged door is used to connect any room to an exit

route. A door to an exit should swing out from a room.

A door that connects any room to an exit route must swing out if

the room is likely to be occupied by more than 50 people or if highly

flammable or explosive materials may be located inside.

[[Page 47721]]

(i) What is the required capacity for exit routes? An employer must

ensure that each exit route supports the maximum-permitted occupant

load for each floor served by the exit route. The capacity of an exit

may not decrease with the direction of exit travel.

(j) What are the height and width requirements for exit routes? An

employer must ensure that the exit route must is at least 6 feet, 8

inches high at all points. An employer must ensure that the exit route

is at least 28 inches wide at all points between handrails. An exit

route must be wider than 28 inches if necessary to accommodate the

expected occupant load. Objects that project into the exit route must

not reduce the minimum height and width of an exit route.

(k) Are there additional requirements for exit routes that are

outside the building? An outdoor exit route is permitted if it meets

the requirements for an indoor exit route and the following additional

requirements:

(1) the exit route has guardrails to protect unenclosed sides;

(2) the exit route is covered if accumulation of snow or ice is

likely and is not removed regularly;

(3) the exit route is reasonably straight with smooth, solid,

substantially level floors; and

(4) the exit route has no dead ends longer than 20 feet.

Sec. 1910.37. Operation and Maintenance of an Exit Route.

(a) How must an employer maintain the workplace to protect

employees during an emergency? An employer must maintain the workplace

to minimize the dangers to employees during an emergency. An employer

must keep the workplace free of explosive or highly flammable

furnishings and other decorations. An exit route must not require

employees to travel toward materials that burn very quickly, emit

poisonous fumes, or are explosive, unless those materials are

effectively shielded from the exit route.

(b) Must exit routes be lit? Yes, an employer must ensure that each

exit route is illuminated adequately.

(c) Must exit routes be marked? Yes, an employer must ensure that

each exit clearly is visible and is marked by a distinctive sign

reading ``Exit.'' The employer must ensure that an exit door is free of

decorations or signs that obscure its visibility. Signs must be posted

along the exit route indicating the direction of travel to the nearest

exit. The employer must ensure that the line-of-sight to an exit sign

is uninterrupted. Any doorway or passage that might be mistaken for an

exit must be marked ``Not an Exit'' or with an indication of its actual

use. The employer must ensure that an exit sign is illuminated to a

surface value of at least 5 foot candles by a reliable light source and

shows a designated color. Self-luminous or electroluminescent signs

that have a minimum luminance surface value of .06 footlamberts are

permitted.

(d) What are the requirements for maintaining fire retardant

paints? An employer must maintain the fire retardant properties of

paints or other coatings used in the workplace.

(e) Must fire safeguards be maintained? Yes, an employer must

ensure that each safeguard to protect employees during an emergency is

maintained in proper working order.

(f) Are there additional requirements for maintaining exit routes

during construction and repair? Yes, three special rules apply to exit

routes during construction and repair. During new construction, an

employer must ensure that employees do not occupy a workplace until an

adequate number of exit routes that comply with these rules is

available for the portion of the workplace employees will occupy.

During repair and alterations, an employer must ensure that employees

do not occupy an existing workplace unless all exits and existing fire

protection are maintained or alternate fire protection is provided that

ensures an equivalent level of safety. An employer also must ensure

that flammable or explosive materials used during construction or

repair do not expose employees to hazards not otherwise present in the

workplace or impede emergency escape from the workplace.

(g) Are employee alarm systems required? An employer must ensure

that an operable employee alarm system with a distinctive signal to

warn employees of fire or other emergencies is installed and

maintained, unless employees can see or smell a fire or other hazard so

that it would provide adequate warning to them. The employee alarm

system must comply with 29 CFR Sec. 1910.165.

Sec. 1910.38. Emergency Action Plans.

(a) When is an employer required to develop an emergency action

plan? An employer must develop an emergency action plan whenever

another OSHA standard requires one. This rule governs what the employer

must include in the plan.

(b) Must the emergency action plan be in writing? An employer must

keep a written emergency action plan in the workplace and make it

available to employees at their request, except that an employer with

10 or fewer employees in the workplace may communicate the plan orally

to employees rather than develop a written plan.

(c) What is required to be included in an emergency action plan? An

emergency action plan must include at a minimum:

(1) procedures for emergency evacuation, including type of

evacuation and exit route assignments;

(2) procedures to account for all employees after evacuation;

(3) procedures for reporting a fire or other emergency;

(4) procedures to follow for emergency operation or shut down of

critical equipment before evacuation;

(5) procedures to follow for rescue and medical duties; and,

(6) names or job titles of employees to be contacted to get more

information about the duties of employees under the plan.

(d) Must an emergency plan include an employee alarm system? Yes,

an employer must install and maintain an employee alarm system. The

alarm system must use a distinctive signal for each purpose and comply

with 29 CFR 1910.165.

(e) Does an employer have to designate employees to assist others

in evacuation? An employer must designate employees to assist in the

safe emergency evacuation of other employees. The employer must ensure

that these designated employees receive training in emergency

evacuation procedures.

(f) How often must an employer inform employees of their duties

under an emergency action plan? An employer must review the emergency

action plan with each employee covered by the plan;

(1) when the plan is developed or the employee is assigned

initially to the job;

(2) when the employee's responsibilities under the plan change; and

(3) when the plan is changed.

Sec. 1910.39. Fire Prevention Plans.

(a) When is an employer required to have a fire prevention plan? An

employer is required to have a fire prevention plan when another OSHA

standard requires it. This section governs what the employer must

include in the plan.

(b) Must the fire prevention plan be in writing? Employers must

keep a written fire prevention plan in the workplace and make it

available to employees at their request. However, an employer with 10

or fewer employees in the workplace may communicate the plan

[[Page 47722]]

orally to employees rather than develop a written plan.

(c) What is required to be included in a fire prevention plan? A

fire prevention plan must include at a minimum:

(1) a list of all major fire hazards, including proper handling and

storage procedures for hazardous materials, potential ignition sources

and their control, and the type of fire protection equipment necessary

to control each major hazard;

(2) procedures to control accumulations of flammable and

combustible waste materials;

(3) procedures for regular maintenance of safeguards installed on

heat producing equipment to prevent accidental ignition of combustible

materials;

(4) names or job titles of employees responsible for maintaining

equipment to prevent or control sources of ignition or fires; and,

(5) names or job titles of employees responsible for control of

fuel source hazards.

(d) Must employers inform employees of the fire hazards at the

workplace? Yes, an employer must inform employees of the fire hazards

to which they are exposed. The employer must review with each employee

those parts of the fire prevention plan necessary for self-protection

upon initial assignment to a job.

Appendix to Subpart E--[Amended]

4. The appendix to Subpart E would be amended by inserting the

heading: ``Sec. 1910.39 Fire prevention plans'' before the paragraph

designated as ``4. Fire prevention housekeeping.''

5. The appendix to subpart E would be amended by redesignating the

paragraph: ``Fire prevention housekeeping'' from ``4.'' to ``1.''

6. The appendix to Subpart E would be amended by redesignating the

paragraph: ``Maintenance of equipment under the fire prevention plan''

from ``5'' to ``2.''

[FR Doc. 96-22926 Filed 9-9-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P