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:

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]