"Um I119 DI U18 NHUUIIHI OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY HEALTH USDL-- ADMINISTRATION Contact: James Foster FOR RELEASE: Monday, December 5, 197 Office: (202) 523?8151 11:30 t.b.1. After Hours: (703) 941?6798 JOB SAFETY AND HEALTH AGENCY PLANS TO REVOKE 1,100 REGULATIONS More than 1,100 job safety ru1es that have no direct or immediate effect on worker safety or hea1th are to be revoked, Labor Secretary Ray Marsha11 and Assistant Secretary EuTa Bingham announced in a joint news conference today. The two officiaTs eXpTained that provisions proposed for revocation inciude such exampTes as 10 of 12 pages of ru1es on portab1e wood 1adders, toi1et seat requirements, and specifications for fire extinguisher mounting heights. The Occupationai Safety and HeaIth Administration (OSHA) is aTso issuing Speciai directions to inspectors that wi11 in most cases e1iminate citations and penaTties for vio1ations of ru1es that have TittTe or nothing to do with empioyee safety and hea1th. few months ago, Dr. Bingham and I announced that we were redirecting the agency to focus on the serious hazards in the workpiaceg? said Marsha11. "Today?s action is another significant step in our efforts. "Unnecessary and over1y compTex regu1ations p1ace a tremendous burden not only on businesses but a150 on our 1imited inspection resources. As a resu1t, worker hea1th and safety suffers. "Thousands of working peopTe suffer serious accidents and i11nesses each year,? expiained MarshaIT, ?yet to the best of our knowiedge none has been caused by the shape of a toiIet seat or because a fire extinguisher was two inches too Tow. That?s why we are today taking steps to e1iminate this kind of picayune reguIation. -more- Heproouceo Irom Ine I UBCIESSITIGCI HOIGIFIQS 0T Ine Nallonal ATCHIVBS -5- ?It is in the interest of business, American worker and OSHA to star nitvaickino and concentrate our efforts on the real hazard Dr. Gingham said, ?The significance of this action noes beyond the obvious beiefits to employers and workers. Today's announcement marks one of the few times in history a government regulatory agency has decreased its rules, rather than addinq more.? Dr. Binohah pointed out that today?s standards revocation project is only .In*l_ I .. . . a heninninn step in the agency's efforts to streamline and simplify i" safety Ll UK) ?nial NHL. and health regulations. She added that the agency also will be proposin?fin-fit. . complete revisions of several major sections of the general industry standards covering such topics as ;alking and working surfaces, fire protection are machinery and machine guardinn. Today's proposed revocation project includes four specific elenents which were explained by the assistant secretanr ?First, we are announcinn our intention to revoke more than l,lOO job safety and health provisions from the general industry standards,? she explained. ?Most of the rules we are proposing for revocation,? Dr. Binpham saida ?were adopted by the agency in l97l from a body of national consensus Standards? These standards were developed by such groups as the American National Standards Institute and the National Fire Protection Agency, and were adopted on the heels A :lulli if the passace of the not. The intent was to insure at least a minirvr ls job safety and health for American workers as soon as possible. ?:nore- KBPFOGUCEG rrom Ine I UGCIBSSITIBG 0! me Nallonal Tits -bniOitunatair we have since learned caac nanv oi ther-I' stancards do not cont.ibute to ennlovee safet\ and health a;nunt erortedt ?For examtle, a provision renuiring that toilet seats shall be o? the open?Front type has nothino to do with worker health and safetyj? exola'r?i il' hy should we have incredibly detailed standards renuirino certiin pi nah-am. 'r tyoes of fire extinguishers to be an exact number of incho? iron the floor i .2 I 3 ten cc nave a section of the standards that simply ?eduires that l5?tl?0dl5hufi In shall be conspicuously located where they will be readily accessible'and \l immedia'ely available in the event of fireo' That kind of simple direCt rsouirx? ment provides protection For workers without placing an unnecessary burden on the employer.? everal criteria were used by OSHA to determine which rules r? lone lik} C) applicable and should not be enforced in the workpl-ce. One drouo of provisicr= .J was found to be obsolete because of technological chanqe or expir 2.- Etc: JH c1163 - time aeriod set forth ii the standard itself. Other rovisions were directed 3sh?gu . 3- ab: primarily to employee comfort and convenience rather than to safety and health un?t hazards. Provisions which were intended only for property protection are also included in the proposed revocation as weli as standards which cover hazards reiulated by another Federal agency. The second part of the announcement outlined the proposed revocation 0? three snecial industry standards, so?called, 'vertical standardss' OSHA is proposinq revoke the entire sections of the general indUStry standard" L_l L- which deal with cooperade, bakind equipment and laundry machinery and operations; . . 41- of 5 '4g; HBPTOUUCGCI ll'OlTl me I HOIUIHQS 01 me Natlonal AFCDIVGS Dr. Binqham noted that employee safety and health for these so hi industries can be safeguarded by using other existing OSHA standards of I general applicability. Any workplace situation not covered by ott-" new 'ESL'Hliig standards would still be covered by the ?general duty? clause in the which requires employers to maintain workplaces free from serious hazards. ?He e?e proposing to revoke these standards to permit OSHA to con enforcement in areas with the highest potential for serious illness Dr. Binqham explained. ine agency is publishing all of the standards proposed for revoc1tion in a special issue of the Federal Register. That issue will completely reprint general induStry standards, showing provisions to be revoked in bc?~?et L). U7 with marginal heavy black lines for further identification. The third part of the announcement establishes guidelines for enforcement of the standards until the revocation process is finalized. ?Revocation is a process,? Dr. Binqham said, ?and we are concerned with taking action now to implement our ?common sense approa nl bf 9 Therefore, violation of those provisions of the General industry standards which are being proposed for revocation will be treated as ?de minimis' in most cases. This means employers will be notified orally, but no written notices or penalties will ensue. In rare instances where a violation of a provision proposed for revocation constitutes a real danger to employee safety, area directors are instructed to confer with their regional administrator before they may issue a citation. However, the cooperage, laundry and bakery standards proposed for revocation will be enforced as usual until the rulemaking process is completed. ?more? neprouuceu erle [ne unolassmeo I UGCIESSIHBU 0] me Nalloflal HTCHIVBS Clarification of the definition of 'de minimis1 and guideliner on a broader use of the 'de minimis' program re? 42 I earth and final part of Dr. Binqham?s announcemeit. The Guidelines set forth three criteria for determinind a ?de minimi in situation. A 'de minimisi condition exists if: An mployer complies with the clear intent of a standard from the particular requirements in a way which has no dirent or immedi?fq relationship to employee safety. Deviations may involve the use of solos, distance requirements, material requirements, specification and sign uordinq and slight variations in inspections, testinq, recordkaepino and maintenance requirements. An employer complies with a proposed amended change to a standard, .atier than with the existinq standar and the proposed amendment provides eer.. or qreater safety and health protection. An employer?s workplace is technically advanced beyond the requirements I .2 of the applicable standards, and provides equivalent or hetter s: 1: A. .J 'Ji health protection. A ?Within these new quidelines and following these criteria, in . . nr- EHUAEH .., . .3:le L'Agid be able to reconnize those situations which do not threaten employee refety health, and thereby concentrate their time and efforts on findind serious danecrs Employers will not be cited for minute differences in implementing the stard=rd as long as the intent of the standard is carried out,? Bineham said. ?gzkg?i ?more? 3.. KGPFOUUCBG me I OT tne AFCHIVES i ?Because of the high level of interest we expect in this rulemahind,? Dr. Gingham concluded, ?we are providing more time thu. normal for oohlic comment; Instead of the usael davs l973. This will permit all form 3 of the media, including tr= asst Ciation magazines, to carry news of our action to their readers. In is may; we hope to get substantial public comment.? OSHA has arranged to print extra copies of this Special issue of the standards, both to elicit informed public comment on the revocation and to provide all parties with an up?to-date reference volume. Each of regional offices and the national office will furnish single and bulk conies free. Publication of the proposed revocation notices will ioear i the rerer~ -- A, Register in about two weeks. Program directives implementing the new enfOrener I Dolicies have been issued to field offices. 21:; :11. up