80 FR 57222 - Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories; Proposed Revised Fee Schedule and Proposed Adoption of New Application Acceptance and Review Procedures
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 183 (September 22, 2015)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 183 (September 22, 2015)
| Page Range | 57222-57231 | |
| FR Document | 2015-24107 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 183 (Tuesday, September 22, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 57222-57231] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-24107] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA-2007-0031] Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories; Proposed Revised Fee Schedule and Proposed Adoption of New Application Acceptance and Review Procedures AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA proposes to revise the schedule of fees that the Agency charges to Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTLs) and NRTL applicants. In addition, OSHA proposes to adopt new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications of organizations seeking to obtain, renew, or expand NRTL recognition. DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on or before October 22, 2015. ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods: 1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions. 2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-1648. 3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier) service: Submit comments, requests, and any attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2007-0031, Technical Data Center, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-2350 (TTY number: (877) 889- 5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security procedures concerning delivery of materials by express mail, hand delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t. 4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the OSHA docket number (OSHA-2007-0031). OSHA places comments and other materials, including any personal information, in the public docket without revision, and these materials may be available online at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters about submitting statements they do not want made available to the public, or submitting comments that contain personal information (either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, and medical data. 5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection at the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket submissions. 6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of the comment period on or before October 7, 2015 to the Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational [[Page 57223]] Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-1644. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: [email protected]. General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson, Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone: (202) 693-2110 or email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction OSHA proposes to adopt new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications of organizations seeking to obtain, renew, or expand NRTL recognition, and to revise the existing NRTL Program fee schedule pursuant to the NRTL Program regulation, 29 CFR 1910.7(f). Section III of this notice covers the proposed adoption of new application acceptance and review procedures, and Section IV covers the proposed revision of the fee schedule. II. Background on the NRTL Program Many of OSHA's safety standards (e.g., 29 CFR 1910, Subpart S) require that equipment and products be tested and certified to help ensure their safe use in the workplace. To implement these requirements, OSHA established the NRTL Program and the Agency generally requires NRTLs to perform this testing and certification. The NRTL Program regulation, 29 CFR 1910.7, requires that, to obtain and retain OSHA recognition as an NRTL, an organization must: (1) Have the appropriate capability to test, evaluate, and approve products to assure their safe use in the workplace; (2) be completely independent of employers subject to the tested equipment requirements and manufacturers and vendors of products for which OSHA requires certification; (3) have internal programs that ensure proper control of the testing and certification process; and (4) have effective reporting and complaint handling procedures (29 CFR 1910.7(b)). OSHA requires organizations applying for NRTL recognition to provide, in their applications, detailed and comprehensive information about their programs, processes, and procedures, in writing. When an organization makes an initial application to be recognized as an NRTL, OSHA reviews the written information contained in the organization's application and conducts an on-site assessment to determine whether the organization meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA uses a similar process when an NRTL applies for expansion or renewal of its recognition, although the type and amount of information in some areas can differ significantly from those of initial applications. In addition, the Agency conducts annual assessments \1\ of NRTLs to ensure that the recognized laboratories adequately maintain their programs and continue to meet the recognition requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ OSHA uses the term ``assessments'' to mean those activities described by the term ``audits'' under 29 CFR 1910.7(f). OSHA uses the term ``assessments,'' rather than ``audits'' because it better reflects the overall purpose of the program's activities, i.e., conformity assessments. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To support these core functions, OSHA also performs a number of ancillary activities. For example, OSHA: Investigates complaints filed against NRTLs to ensure that the laboratories are performing their testing and certification functions adequately; represents the NRTL Program in a variety of forums related to conformity assessment products used in the workplace; and maintains a detailed Web site that both explains the program and, more importantly for the NRTLs, lists all the laboratories currently recognized under the NRTL Program, the products each laboratory can test, and registered certification marks used by each laboratory. III. Proposed Revision of Existing Application Acceptance and Review Procedures OSHA currently has a number of initiatives underway to improve the operations of the NRTL Program. This section of the notice discusses one such initiative, under which OSHA proposes new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications of organizations seeking to obtain, renew, or expand NRTL recognition. OSHA would follow these new procedures in lieu of those contained in the Agency's existing NRTL Program Directive (CPL 1-0.3, NRTL Program Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines, December 2, 1999) (``Directive'' or ``NRTL Program Directive'') and the additional practices OSHA has routinely followed in accepting applications. OSHA proposes the adoption of the new streamlined procedures to eliminate delays caused by multiple revisions by an applicant during the application-acceptance and -review process. In addition, OSHA seeks to simplify the application process to make it clearer when the application acceptance process ends and the substantive application review process begins. This streamlined application process would also reduce NRTL Program fees, as OSHA will discuss later in this notice. The existing procedures for application acceptance and review are contained in both Appendix A to the NRTL Program regulations (``Appendix A'') and the NRTL Program Directive. OSHA does not propose, in this notice, to revise Appendix A; instead, as stated, OSHA proposes to follow new streamlined procedures in lieu of the existing procedures in the Directive. The new streamlined procedures would be consistent with, and would clarify, the procedures contained in Appendix A. A. Existing Procedures in Appendix A That Are Not Subject to Revision in This Notice Per Appendix A, the burden is generally ``on the applicant to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it is entitled to recognition as an NRTL'' (App. A. Introduction). Thus, in its application, an applicant must ``provide sufficient information and detail demonstrating that it meets the requirements set forth in Sec. 1910.7, in order for an informed decision concerning recognition to be made'' by the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health (``Assistant Secretary''), and must also ``identify the scope of the NRTL-related activity for which the applicant wishes to be recognized'' (i.e., the test standards the applicant will use for testing products) (App. A.I.A.2.b). To meet its burden, the applicant may include any documentation (i.e., enclosures, attachments, or exhibits) it deems appropriate (App. A.I.A.2.c). Also under Appendix A, ``[a]pplications submitted by eligible testing agencies will be accepted by OSHA, and their receipt acknowledged in writing'' (App. A.I.B.1.a). Moreover, ``[a]fter receipt of an application, OSHA may request additional information if it believes information relevant to the requirements for recognition has been omitted'' (Id.). In addition, ``OSHA shall, as necessary, conduct an on-site review of the testing facilities of the [[Page 57224]] applicant, as well as the applicant's administrative and technical practices, and, if necessary, review any additional documentation underlying the application'' (App. A.I.B.1.b). Appendix A provides the responsible OSHA staff with two options following review of the application, and any additional information and on-site review report. On the one hand, if ``the applicant appears to have met the requirements for recognition,'' responsible OSHA staff must make a ``positive finding'' to the Assistant Secretary, which consists of ``a written recommendation . . . that the application be approved, accompanied by a supporting explanation'' (App. A.I.B.2). Once this recommendation is made, OSHA follows the procedures in the Appendix for making preliminary and final findings on the application (App. A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6). On the other hand, if ``the applicant does not appear to have met the requirements for recognition,'' responsible OSHA staff must make a ``negative finding'' to the ``applicant in writing, listing the specific requirements of Sec. 1910.7 and [Appendix A] which the applicant has not met, and allow[ing] a reasonable period for response'' (App. A.I.B.3.a). After the applicant receives ``a notification of negative finding (i.e., for intended disapproval of the application), and within the response period provided,'' the applicant may either (1) ``[s]ubmit a revised application for further review, which could result in a positive finding'' (the procedures for which are explained in the previous paragraph), or (2) ``[r]equest that the original application be submitted to the Assistant Secretary with an attached statement of reasons, supplied by the applicant of why the application should be approved'' (App. A.I.B.3.b.i). In either case (i.e., if a positive finding is made on a revised application or if the applicant requests that the original application be submitted to the Assistant Secretary), OSHA would follow the procedures in the Appendix for making preliminary and final findings on the application (App. A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6). The ``procedure for applicant notification and potential revision shall be used only once during each recognition process'' (App. A.I.B.3.b.ii). B. OSHA Proposes That It Will No Longer Follow Existing NRTL Program Directive Procedures for Accepting and Reviewing Applications Existing policies contained in the NRTL Program Directive expand on the application procedures contained in Appendix A, as follows. Per the Directive, OSHA staff ``formally accept or reject the application'' based on a review of the application for ``completeness and for adequacy'' (Directive Ch.2.V.B, Ch. 3.II.B.1). The procedures for this review are contained in Appendix D to the Directive (Directive Ch. 3.II.B.1). An application is considered complete ``if it contains all necessary documents, and sufficient information for all relevant items,'' and is considered adequate ``if the information submitted sufficiently demonstrates that the requirements for recognition can be met, and where relevant, if at least one test standard requested can be approved'' (Directive App. D) (emphasis in original). In reviewing the application, OSHA staff will return and ``take[] no further action'' on an application ``[i]f [the] application is frivolous or grossly incomplete or inadequate.'' In such circumstances, ``any future application from the applicant'' will be processed ``as a new application'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.A). If the application is not ``frivolous or grossly incomplete or inadequate,'' OSHA staff discusses its review with the applicant, ``noting any deficiencies found or clarifications needed'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.B.2). If the ``application is determined to be complete and adequate,'' OSHA ``sends a letter to the applicant to accept the application'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.C). If the application is determined to be incomplete or inadequate, the Directive provides two opportunities for applicants to correct deficiencies before rejection of an application (Directive Ch. 3.II.C). In practice, however, OSHA has given applicants three such opportunities. Per the Directive, OSHA ``sends a letter to the applicant, detailing the deficiencies and the additional information needed and requesting a response by an appropriate deadline,'' and if ``the response does not adequately resolve the deficiencies,'' OSHA ``provides the applicant a [second] opportunity to respond within a given period.'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.C.) If deficiencies remain after the second opportunity, OSHA, in practice, gives applicants a third, but relatively limited, opportunity to make corrections before the effective date of the rejection. This limited duration is sufficient for applicants to correct deficiencies if only a few critical deficiencies remain. If an applicant's timely response cures the deficiencies in its application, OSHA ``sends an acceptance letter to the applicant'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.C). However, ``[i]f the applicant does not respond adequately or fails to reply by any deadline(s) provided or an approved extension of these deadline(s),'' OSHA ``sends a letter notifying the applicant that the application is not accepted and the Case File is closed'' (Directive Ch. 3.II.C.2). Finally, the Directive provides that, after an application is accepted, ``the assigned staff determines whether an on-site review is necessary'' (Directive Ch.3.II.D). However, the Directive also provides for non-acceptance during the on-site review process, if an applicant fails to respond adequately to the findings of an on-site review (Directive Ch.4.IV.C). Under OSHA's proposal, it would no longer follow the existing procedures, described above, to afford applicants three opportunities to modify their applications before acceptance or non-acceptance. This existing procedure is inefficient and causes delays because, in some cases, these multiple opportunities cause the process to take years. OSHA would also not follow its existing procedure for accepting an application only when it is found to be complete and adequate. This existing procedure has caused confusion as to when the application acceptance process ends and the substantive application review process begins. C. OSHA Proposes new Streamlined Procedures for Accepting and Reviewing Applications In lieu of the existing NRTL Program Directive procedures, described above, OSHA proposes to follow streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications. These streamlined procedures would reduce delays, fees, and confusion associated with application processing. Under these streamlined procedures, OSHA would review an application for completeness, but not adequacy, in deciding whether to accept the application. OSHA's review for adequacy, and any on-site review, would occur only after OSHA accepted the application. Furthermore, OSHA would permit the applicant one opportunity only, rather than three, to resolve deficiencies in the completeness of its application before deciding whether to accept it. OSHA describes these proposed streamlined procedures in more detail, below. 1. Initial Review and Acceptance When it receives an application, OSHA would acknowledge its receipt, establish (for initial applications) or update (for expansion and renewal applications) the docket for the organization, and upload the [[Page 57225]] application materials to the docket.\2\ OSHA would perform an administrative review of the application to determine whether it is complete (i.e., has sufficient information to determine whether the applicant meets the requirements for recognition). If not complete, OSHA would notify the applicant, in writing, that it has 30 days from the date of the notice to provide the missing or additional information. OSHA would also inform the applicant, in the notice, that it is unable to review the merits of the application because the application itself does not contain sufficient information to show that the requirements for recognition can be met. Finally, OSHA would inform the applicant, in the notice, that this review involved no technical determination, only an administrative one of whether the application has all of the necessary documentation. If the applicant does not respond by the 30-day deadline, or does not adequately respond, and the application remains incomplete, OSHA would inform the applicant that OSHA cannot accept the application, and the applicant must reapply. If the applicant provides a complete application within the 30 days, or provided a complete application when it was first received, OSHA would accept the application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ As currently used by OSHA, the term ``docket'' means an electronic file folder containing documents that pertain to an official action taken by the Agency. OSHA generally makes these documents available to the public. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Determination of Adequacy After accepting the application, OSHA would review the merits of the application to determine whether the application is adequate. OSHA would first conduct a technical review of the application (i.e., a detailed review of all of the application's administrative and technical procedures and content). Following this technical review, OSHA would determine whether to conduct an on-site assessment as part of evaluating the management system and technical capabilities of the organization. OSHA would generally conduct an on-site review for initial applications and for expansion applications that involve new areas of testing for the NRTL or areas of concern to OSHA. If OSHA finds deficiencies during the technical review or during the on-site assessment, OSHA would provide the applicant with an explanation of deficiencies and needed corrections, and a 90-day opportunity to respond. Failure to respond by the 90-day deadline would constitute a withdrawal of the application, and OSHA would take no further action on it. If the applicant or NRTL responds, it would need to demonstrate it corrected all deficiencies found in its application and/or during the assessment, and provide evidence to OSHA that the corrections have been implemented into the applicant's or NRTL's management systems. In that case, OSHA would conclude the application is adequate. On the other hand, if OSHA finds that deficiencies remain, OSHA would conclude the application is not adequate. If OSHA staff determines an application is adequate, OSHA would follow existing procedures, and recommend a positive finding, per Appendix A.I.B.2. Otherwise, OSHA staff would notify the applicant in writing that they intend to recommend a negative finding. In that case, the applicant has two options under Appendix A.I.B.3. First, the applicant has one additional chance to revise its application within 30 days of receipt of OSHA's written notice. Second, the applicant may request that its original application (as supplemented in response during the review for adequacy) be submitted to the Assistant Secretary (also within 30 days of receipt of OSHA's written notice). In this case, the applicant must attach a statement of reasons to the application explaining why the application should be approved. OSHA would consider the failure to submit a revised application or a request that the original application be submitted to the Assistant Secretary within the 30-day deadline to be a withdrawal of the application. If the applicant opts to revise its application, OSHA would invoice the applicant for the fee to review its revised submission. This fee would equal the estimated hours for the review multiplied by the hourly rate for the applicable Miscellaneous Fee in the NRTL Program's fee schedule. Like other application fees, this review fee would not be refundable. The applicant would need to pay this fee before OSHA performs the review of the revised application. OSHA would consider a failure to pay the fee within 30 days of receipt of the invoice as a withdrawal of the application. When OSHA receives the fee, OSHA would review the revised application to determine whether to sustain the negative finding or change it to a positive one. If OSHA staff decides to sustain the recommendation for a negative finding, they would first afford the applicant the opportunity to withdraw the application. If the applicant does not withdraw it, OSHA would proceed with the preliminary finding. Once OSHA staff recommends a positive finding on either an original or revised application, sustains its recommendation for a negative finding after a review of a revised application, or the applicant requests that the original application be submitted to the Assistant Secretary, OSHA would follow the procedures in Appendix A for making preliminary and final findings on the application (App. A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6). IV. Proposed Revision of the NRTL Program Fee Schedule A. Background OSHA proposes to revise the existing NRTL Program fee schedule pursuant to the NRTL Program regulation, 29 CFR 1910.7(f). That regulation requires NRTLs and applicants to ``pay fees for services provided by OSHA in advance of the provision of those services'' (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(1)). OSHA assesses fees for core service activities, that is, for ``[p]rocessing of applications for initial recognition, expansion of recognition, or renewal of recognition, including on-site reviews; review and evaluation of the applications; and preparation of reports, evaluations and Federal Register notices;'' and ``[a]udits of sites'' (Id.). OSHA's fee schedule ``reflects the full cost of performing the activities'' for these services (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(2)). OSHA calculates fees ``based on either the average or actual time required to perform the work necessary; the staff costs per hour (which include wages, fringe benefits, and expenses other than travel for personnel that perform or administer the activities covered by the fees); and the average or actual costs for travel when on-site reviews are involved'' (Id.). Thus, the formula for calculating a fee for an activity is the ``[Average (or Actual) Hours to Complete the Activity x Staff Costs per Hour] + Average (or Actual) Travel Costs'' (Id.). OSHA periodically reviews the full costs of performing core services and, if warranted, will propose a revised fee schedule in the Federal Register (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(3), (f)(4)). If OSHA approves the proposed fee schedule (after giving the public an opportunity to comment), it ``publish[es] the final fee schedule in the Federal Register, making the fee schedule effective on a specific date'' (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(3), (f)(4)). To ensure that its fees for core services reflect the full cost of those services, OSHA's existing fee schedule (which OSHA adopted in 2011) takes into account both the direct and indirect costs it incurs in performing those services (76 FR 10501-10504). Direct costs include staff costs (i.e. the applicable portion of the salaries and [[Page 57226]] fringe benefits of the applicable staff) incurred for application processing and assessment (Id.). Ancillary (or indirect) costs include staff costs incurred for the administration and support of the program, including legal support, budgeting, policy matters, intragency and international coordination, responses to requests for information related to the program, handling complaints, Web site development and maintenance, and participation in meetings with stakeholders and outside interest groups (Id.). OSHA refers to the sum of its direct costs and ancillary costs as the total program costs (TPC) for the purpose of this notice. TPC does not include travel expenses, which are assessed separately (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(2), 76 FR 10504 n.5). In the existing fee schedule, OSHA calculates the fee for each core service activity by multiplying an equivalent average cost per hour rate (ECR) by the time it takes to perform that activity: Fee for Activity = ECR x Time for Activity (76 FR 10504). In 2000, when OSHA began assessing fees for services, OSHA explained that it derived that fee schedule's ECR by dividing TPC by the total available annual work hours of the NRTL Program and legal staff that perform the services (TAW) (Id.). Accordingly, ECR2000 = TPC2000/TAW2000. The approach used in 2000 resulted in fees that recouped the costs only of the time spent actually performing individualized audits and application processing, which is only a portion of TAW, and did not recoup the costs of the time associated with running the program and providing other benefits shared among all NRTLs (Id.). To account for the costs associated with these shared benefits, OSHA adopted a new approach for calculating ECR (ECR2011) in the existing fee schedule (Id.). Under the new approach, OSHA divides the estimated total cost of the NRTL Program (TPC2011) by the total annual service hours (TAS2011) (Id.). This latter term equals the total estimated work hours that the NRTL Program staff spend on the core service activities for which OSHA would bill NRTLs; accordingly, ECR2011 = TPC2011/TAS2011 (Id.). By way of comparison with the 2000 fee schedule, TAS equals TAW minus estimated hours spent on ancillary activities (AH) and leave (LH) (i.e., TAS = TAW - AH - LH) (Id.). By continuing to include the full program costs in the numerator (TPC2011), but including in the denominator (TAS2011) only the amount of time spent on providing ``billable'' core services, OSHA believed the revised ECR would more accurately represent the total work hours spent on those core activities than the 2000 equation \3\ (Id.). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ The existing fee schedule was supposed to have been phased in over a three-year phase-in period. (76 FR 10508). OSHA implemented the first phase on March 28, 2011. However, due to other priorities and factors, OSHA was unable to implement the second and third phases of the increase, as planned. The revised fee schedule OSHA proposes in the current notice would render moot the implementation of the second and third phases. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Explanation of Proposed Revision of Fee Schedule OSHA has reviewed its existing fee schedule and, based on that review, proposes to revise its fee schedule. This proposed fee schedule would more accurately reflect the full cost of performing the activities for which OSHA charges fees. OSHA proposes the following: 1. OSHA proposes a new grouping of fees for each of the core activities for which OSHA charges fees to NRTLs (i.e., ``[p]rocessing of applications for initial recognition, expansion of recognition, or renewal of recognition, including on-site reviews; review and evaluation of the applications; and preparation of reports, evaluations and Federal Register notices;'' and ``[a]udits of sites'' (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(1)). Under the existing fee schedule, OSHA groups these activities under the terms Application Processing, Audits, and Miscellaneous (76 FR 10508). Under OSHA's proposed fee schedule, shown below in Table A, OSHA would group these activities under the terms: Administrative Evaluation, Technical Evaluation, Assessments, Federal Register Notices, and Miscellaneous (which includes late fees and other activities not specifically described). OSHA proposes these new groupings to align its fee schedule with the proposed streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications, described above. OSHA also believes that the times it proposes estimating for completion of these activities (see Tables 2 thru 5, below) more accurately represent the actual time it takes to complete the core activities for which OSHA charges fees. Therefore, adoption of the proposed groupings would more accurately reflect the full cost of the services for which fees are assessed. 2. OSHA proposes to revise the approach it uses to calculate ECR. Again, under the existing approach, OSHA calculates ECR by dividing TPC by the total estimated work hours that the NRTL Program staff and legal staff spend on the core service activities for which OSHA bills NRTLs (or TAS) (76 FR 10504). The existing approach depends, in large measure, on OSHA estimating an accurate TAS (i.e., number of ``billable'' core hours). If this estimate is accurate, the ECR (i.e., the hourly rate OSHA charges for services) will accurately reflect the full cost of services (because ECR = TPC/TAS). But OSHA's estimate has not been accurate in practice. Due in part to insufficient program staffing and other uncontrollable factors, the staff has been unable to work the number of estimated billable hours. This has resulted in an hourly rate charged by OSHA that results in fees that are far lower than the fees OSHA would be charging if its estimate had been accurate. OSHA could reassess TAS on a regular basis to achieve a more accurate estimate. However, due to the changing nature of the staff's workload, OSHA likely would need to make such calculation adjustments, and thus publish fee schedules, more than once within a given year to ensure an accurate estimate. OSHA likely could not make such adjustments in a timely manner, largely due to the length of the process for issuing fee schedules. OSHA proposes to simplify the existing calculation; for the purpose of the fees proposed in this notice, OSHA would assume that certain NRTL Program staff (which OSHA calls ``direct staff'' in this notice) work exclusively on core billable activities, and that other NRTL Program staff (which OSHA calls ``indirect staff'' in this notice) work exclusively on ancillary activities. Under the proposal, OSHA would calculate the ECR (ECR2015) by dividing TPC by total direct staff annual paid (i.e., compensable) hours, or simply, direct staff annual hours (DSH). Because of the difficulties of implementing the existing approach, OSHA believes the proposed change in approach (replacing TAS with DSH) would, on average and in practice, more accurately reflect the full cost of services for which OSHA charges fees than the existing approach. The accuracy of the DSH approach also does not depend on the variable workload of staff, and would therefore be simpler to implement than the existing approach. OSHA estimates for the proposal that four full-time NRTL Program staff members are direct staff and the other full-time NRTL Program staff member is indirect staff. OSHA believes the estimate of four full-time direct staff is reasonable because OSHA projects a significant increase in the number of applications the NRTL Program will process and audits the NRTL Program will perform (i.e., a significant increase [[Page 57227]] in the time NRTL Program staff will spend on core activities). For the purposes of the proposed fee calculation, DSH would equal 8,352 hours. This is derived by multiplying 2,088, the regular annual paid hours for one full-time staff, by the number of full-time direct staff \4\ (again, currently four). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ This figure is the number of compensable hours in a fiscal year, which is used to determine full-time equivalents (FTE) (i.e., full-time staffing levels) for purposes of the Federal Budget. See Office and Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, Section 85--Estimating Employment Levels and the Employment Summary (Schedule Q), 2015 (available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/a11_current_year/s85.pdf). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. OSHA proposes to break out the fees for the legal review of Federal Register notices associated with initial, renewal, and expansion applications from the general fees it charges for preparation of these Federal Register notices by NRTL Program staff. Under the existing fee structure, OSHA charges one general fee that covers both preparation and legal review of a Final Report and Federal Register notice (76 FR 10505-10511).\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ Although OSHA did not state explicitly in the 2011 notice that the Final Report and Federal Register notice fee included legal review, the hours used for calculating this fee did in fact include the legal staff's time for this review. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OSHA proposes this revision to more accurately reflect the portion of the fees attributed to legal review. Under the existing fee structure, OSHA charges a single hourly rate for core activities, regardless of whether the time charged is attorney time or NRTL Program staff time (76 FR 10505). Under the proposed fee structure, OSHA calculates a separate hourly rate for core activities performed by legal staff to reflect that certain ancillary costs, such as Web site development and maintenance, which are properly incorporated into the hourly rate for NRTL Program staff, should not be incorporated into the hourly rate for legal services. OSHA would continue to incorporate in the hourly rate for legal costs those indirect costs that tie directly into the salary of legal staff, such as fringe benefits. As a result of the proposed change, the hourly rate for legal fees, shown in Table 5, would be less than the rate for NRTL Program staff fees, shown in Table 1. OSHA notes that the Department of Labor incurs legal costs in connection with the NRTL Program other than costs associated with the legal review of Federal Register notices associated with initial, renewal, and expansion applications. These other legal costs are included in the existing fee schedule (See 76 FR 10504 n.5), and would continue to be included in the proposed fee schedule, as elements in TPC, and therefore, as elements of the calculation of the hourly rate for NRTL Program staff. 4. OSHA proposes to revise the manner it calculates the salaries of NRTL Program staff and Solicitor of Labor staff for the purpose of calculating TPC. For the existing fee schedule, OSHA calculates staff costs using actual staff salaries, which can vary, sometimes significantly, over time due to changes in personnel and positions. OSHA proposes to calculate salaries using midpoint salaries. These midpoint salaries are the Step 5 amounts shown for a particular grade (e.g., grade 13) in the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) General Schedule (GS) salary table for 2015, called the ``Salary Table 2015- DCB,'' which pertains to federal workers who have duty stations located mostly in Washington, D.C, Maryland, and Virginia. (See Office of Personnel Management 2015 General Schedule (GS) Locality Pay Tables at www.opm.gov.) These midpoint salaries may differ from actual staff salaries, which depend on the actual grade and step for each staff. However, using these midpoint figures would simplify the calculation of the staff costs and provide a consistent fee that OSHA expects will reflect, on average, actual staff salaries over time. Because OPM adjusts its salary tables annually, OSHA would monitor the adjustments to determine if their magnitude requires modification of the fee schedule. Also, to include an amount for regular fringe benefits, OSHA would multiply the midpoint salaries by a fringe benefit rate. OSHA proposes to use a 29% rate, and bases this rate on the one the Agency uses to estimate fringe costs of other OSHA activities. 5. OSHA proposes to revise the manner in which it calculates ancillary (or indirect) costs. Under the existing fee schedule, OSHA includes, in its calculation of ancillary (or indirect) costs, equipment, training, and space of the staff. Under the proposed fee schedule, OSHA would not include these items in its calculation of ancillary costs because NRTLs do not derive a special benefit from these cost items. For example, training costs for the program staff currently consist of general training available to all employees. OSHA would include such costs in future fee schedules if it determines that NRTLs do derive special benefits from the items. OSHA believes the proposed revision to the fee schedule would more accurately reflect the full costs of performing the activities for which OSHA charges fees. 6. OSHA proposes to not charge fees for determining whether proposed test standards are appropriate test standards under the NRTL Program. OSHA charges such fees under the existing fee schedule. However, OSHA recently updated its process whereby it incorporates new test standards into the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test standards (the scope of an appropriate test standard must cover products for which OSHA requires NRTL approval and must meet the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7(c)(1)). Under the updated policy, OSHA adds new test standards when it is made aware of new test standards and determines them appropriate (79 FR 17188). It is therefore no longer necessary to charge NRTLs specific fees in connection with the incorporation of standards into the list of appropriate test standards. OSHA notes, however, that the costs associated with the incorporation of test standards would be ancillary costs under the proposed fee schedule, and would therefore be an element in the calculation of the fees OSHA proposes to assess. C. Basis and Derivation of Proposed Fee Amounts Table 1, below, shows the direct and indirect program costs (TPC), direct staff annual hours (DSH), and hourly rate OSHA proposes to use to calculate the revised fees. Table 1--NRTL Program Staff--Hourly Rate Calculation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------ OSHA Direct Costs.................................... $579,383 OSHA Ancillary Costs................................. 287,541 ------------------ OSHA Total Costs of NRTL Program, excluding 866,924 travel (TPC).................................... OSHA Direct Staff Annual Hours (DSH)................. 8,352 [[Page 57228]] OSHA Hourly rate (TPC divided by DSH)................ 104 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tables 2 to 5, below, describe the fees OSHA proposes to adopt in conjunction with the core services for which OSHA charges fees. OSHA would calculate each fee (with the exception of fees for legal review of Federal Register notices) by multiplying the NRTL Program staff hourly rate of $104 (see Table 1, above) by the time OSHA estimates it takes NRTL Program staff to perform the activity at issue, on average (i.e., fee for activity = NRTL Program staff hourly rate ($104) X estimated time for activity). OSHA would calculate the fees for legal review of Federal Register notices by multiplying the hourly rate for legal services of $89 (see Table 5, below) by the time OSHA estimates its takes legal staff to perform the activity at issue, on average (i.e., fee for activity = legal staff hourly rate ($89) X estimated time for activity). OSHA notes that it rounds the proposed fees down to the lower multiple of ten. OSHA's proposed (and existing) fee for travel related to assessments is based on actual travel expenses, and thus OSHA does not derive a fee to charge for travel. Table 2--Proposed Fees for Administrative Evaluation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program component Average hours Fee ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Initial Application--Limited review (per 40 $4,160 application)........................... Expansion Application--Limited review 24 2,490 (per application)...................... Renewal request review.................. 16 1,660 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 3--Proposed Fees for Technical Evaluation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program Component Average Hours Fee ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Initial Application--Management 80 $8,320 Procedures review (per application).... Initial or Expansion Application-- 24 2,490 Testing capability review (per standard).............................. Initial or Expansion Application--Site 24 2,490 capability review (per site)........... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 4--Proposed Fees for Assessments ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program component Average hours Fee ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Assessment preparation and close out 54 $5,610 (per lead auditor)..................... Assessment preparation and close out 32 3,320 (per assistant auditor)................ Each day on-site or at office (per 8 830 auditor)............................... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 5. Proposed Fees for Federal Register Notices ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program component Average hours Fee ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Initial Application Federal Register 20 $4,080 notice preparation (per application)**. Initial Application Federal Register 16 1,420 notice legal review (per application).. Total for Initial Application Federal 36 5,500 Register notices....................... Renewal or Expansion Application Federal 16 2,470 Register notice preparation (per application) **........................ Renewal or Expansion Application Federal 8 710 Register notice legal review (per application)........................... Total for Renewal or Expansion 24 3,180 Application Federal Register notices... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Includes estimated Office of Federal Register (OFR) processing fees: $2,000 per initial application notice, or $810 per expansion and renewal notice, as applicable.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ The OFR charges Federal agencies a per column rate for publishing Federal Register notices. See http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/write/conference/publishing-billing.pdf. OSHA derived an estimated average processing fee based on the number of columns in typical Federal Register notices published for the NRTL Program. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Proposed Fee Schedule and Description of Fees OSHA proposes the adjusted fee schedule shown below in Table A. Table A--Proposed NRTL Program Fee Schedule ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fee category Fee activity Fee * ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Administrative Evaluation... Initial application-- $4,160. Limited review. Expansion 2,490. application--Limite d review. [[Page 57229]] Renewal request 1,660. review. Technical Evaluation........ Initial application-- 8,300. Detailed management procedures review. Initial or Expansion 2,490. application--Testin g capability review (per standard). Initial or Expansion 2,490. application--Site capability review (per site). Assessment.................. Assessment 5,610. preparation and close out (per lead auditor, per site). Assessment 3,320. preparation and close out (per assistant auditor, per site). Assessment--per day 830 plus travel at office, on-site, expenses. or on travel (per auditor, per site). Federal Register Notices.... Federal Register 5,500. notices--initial application. Federal Register 3,180. notices--renewal or expansion application. Miscellaneous............... Late Fees........... 210. Other activities or 104. services not specifically described (per hour). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * All fees must be paid in advance of activity or service. General Information Regarding the Fees 1. Explanation of FeesThe Administrative Evaluation fee covers an administrative review of the application packet to ensure completeness. It also covers creating the docket and addition of the application to the docket. An applicant must submit this fee with the application. The Technical Evaluation fee covers a detailed examination of the application packet to determine the applicant's ability to meet the requirements of the requested recognition/expansion. An applicant must submit this fee with the application. On-site or office assessment fees are calculated based on estimated staff time and, if applicable, actual travel expenses. Travel expenses include expenses for hotel, air transportation, ground transportation, and per diem. The assessment preparation and close-out fees (per lead and assistant auditor, as applicable) include staff time to make travel arrangements and file travel reimbursement claims. At the conclusion of the assessment, actual travel expenses are calculated based on the government per diem and other travel rules. OSHA will bill or refund the difference between the prepaid and the actual travel amounts. The fees for ``Other activities or services not specifically described'' cover application- or assessment-related activities that are not specifically covered by the other fee categories. One example would be the technical review of a revised application that an applicant submits to OSHA in response to OSHA's negative finding on an applicant's original application. 2. Refunds If an application is withdrawn before OSHA commences the Technical Evaluation, or the application is rejected after OSHA completes the Administrative Evaluation, OSHA will refund the Technical Evaluation fee. If an application is withdrawn before OSHA commences travel to a site to perform an on-site assessment, the Agency will refund any prepaid assessment fees. 3. Late Fees/Failure to Pay. If an invoice is not paid in full by the due date, the Late Payment fee will be assessed. If payment for an application is not received within 30 days of the invoice's original due date, the application will be rejected. If payment for an assessment is not received within 30 days of the invoice's original due date, OSHA will commence the process to revoke the NRTL's recognition (see 29 CFR 1910.7, App. A.II.E). OSHA notes that NRTLs or applicants may be subject to collection procedures under U.S. Federal law for unpaid fees. 4. Changes to Fee Schedule. The effective date of this fee schedule is thirty days after the publication of the Assistant Secretary's final decision in the Federal Register. An NRTL or applicant pays fees according to the fee schedule in effect on the date the Agency receives an application or commences an on-site assessment. E. Comparison of Current and Proposed Fees The following table shows the differences between the existing fee schedule and the proposed fee schedule shown in Table A, above. Table 6--Differences Between Planned 2013 Fees and the Proposed Fee Amounts ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed activity or Current activity or category Planned 2013 fee amount * category Proposed fee amount. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initial application review....... $17,750.................. Initial application-- $4,160. Limited review. Initial application-- 8,300. Detailed management procedures review. Initial or Expansion 2,490. application--Site capability review (assuming one site--add $2,490 for each additional site). Subtotal Initial........ 14,950. Expansion-application review (per 8,280.................... Expansion application-- 2,490. additional site). Limited review. Initial or Expansion 2,490. application--Site capability review (assuming one site--add $2,490 for each additional site). Subtotal Expansion...... 4,980. Renewal or expansion (other) 300...................... Renewal request review.. 1,660. application review. Expansion application-- 2,490. Limited review. Renewal information review fee... 2,370.................... None.................... 0. [[Page 57230]] Additional review--initial 2,370.................... None.................... 0. application (if the application requires substantial revision, submit one-half of initial- application review fee). Additional review--renewal or 730...................... None.................... 0. expansion application. Limited review--initial 3,550.................... Initial application-- 4,160. application. Limited review. Assessment--initial application 4,440 plus travel Assessment preparation 5,610. (per person, per site--first expenses. and close out (per lead day). auditor, per site). Assessment--renewal application 4,140 plus travel (per person, per site--first expenses.. day). Assessment--expansion application 3,550 plus travel (additional site) (per person, expenses.. per site--first day). Assessment--expansion application 2,960 plus travel (other) (per person, per site-- expenses.. first day). None............................. NA....................... Assessment preparation 3,320. and close out (per assistant auditor, per site). Assessment--each additional day 1,180 plus travel Assessment--per day at 830 plus travel or each day on travel (per expenses. office, on-site, or on expenses. person, per site). travel (per auditor, per site). Review and evaluation ($30 per 30 per standard OR 296 Initial or Expansion 2,490. standard if already recognized per standard. application--Testing for NRTLs and requires minimal capability review (per review; otherwise, $296 per standard). standard). Final report and Federal Register 19,520................... Federal Register 5,500. notice--initial application. notices--initial application. Final report and Federal Register 7,390.................... Federal Register 3,180. notice--renewal or expansion notices--renewal or application (if OSHA performs on- expansion application. site assessment). Final report and Federal Register 4,440.................... notice--renewal or expansion application (if OSHA performs no on-site assessment). On-site audit (per person, per 7,400 plus travel Assessment preparation 5,610. site, first day) expenses. and close out (per lead nonconformances). auditor, per site). On-site audit (per person, per 7,400 plus travel Assessment preparation 3,320. site, first day). expenses. and close out (per assistant auditor, per site). On-site audit--each additional 1,180 plus travel Assessment--per day at 830 plus travel day (on-site or on travel) (per expenses. office, on-site, or on Expenses. person, per site); or review of travel (per auditor, revised audit response--per on- per site). site or office audit. Office audit (per person, per 1,180 or 2,370........... Assessment preparation 5,610. site, per day) (lower fee and close out (per lead applies if no nonconformances). auditor, per site). Supplemental travel (per site-- 1,000.................... None.................... 0. for sites located outside the 48 contiguous U.S. states or the District of Columbia). Supplemental program review (per 590...................... None.................... 0. program requested). Invoice processing fee (per 300...................... Included in Assessment 0. application or audit). preparation and close out (per lead auditor, per site). Travel document processing (4 590...................... Included in Assessment 0. hours, per application or audit). preparation and close out. Late payment..................... 150...................... Late payment............ 210. Compensatory time for travel (per 56.40.................... Included in Assessment-- None. hour). per day at office, on site, or on travel (per auditor, per hour). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * These fee amounts represent fees that were to have been associated with phase 3 of the fee increase authorized by OSHA's February 2011 final rule pertaining to NRTL Program fees (see footnote 3, above). As the Table shows, the proposed fees for individual core service activities are often significantly less than the analogous existing fees for such services. These changes arise from the change in the way that OSHA is proposing to calculate the ECR (which excludes some previously included indirect costs but increases the number of direct staff hours) and streamlined review procedures (which decrease the amount of staff hours needed for some tasks in the process). OSHA nonetheless estimates that fees collected under the proposed fee schedule will, in toto, approximate the full costs of administering the NRTL Program because, as stated above, OSHA estimates a significant increase in the number of applications the NRTL Program will process and audits the NRTL Program will perform (i.e., a significant increase in the time NRTL Program staff will spend on core service activities). V. Proposed Decision OSHA performed its periodic review of the fees it currently charges to NRTLs, as provided under 29 CFR 1910.7(f). Based on this review, OSHA preliminarily determined that the existing fee schedule warrants adjustment, as detailed in this notice. As a result, OSHA proposes to replace the existing fee schedule with the proposed fee schedule shown in Table A, above. OSHA also proposes to adopt new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications of organizations seeking to obtain, renew, or expand NRTL recognition, as described above. OSHA welcomes public comments on this notice. Comments should consist of [[Page 57231]] pertinent written documents and exhibits. Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request in writing, stating the reasons for the request. Commenters must submit comments or requests for extensions by the due dates, and follow all instructions for submitting comments and requests for extensions, specified in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections of this notice. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester justifies a longer period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if the request is not adequately justified. OSHA staff will review all timely-submitted comments to the docket and, after addressing the issues raised by timely-submitted comments, will recommend to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health whether to adopt the proposed NRTL Program fee schedule and new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications. The Agency will publish a final fee schedule in the Federal Register, as provided under 29 CFR 1910.7, as well as a final decision on whether to adopt the new streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications. The final fee schedule would become effective 30 days after the date of publication of the schedule in the Federal Register, and the final streamlined procedures for accepting and reviewing applications would become effective on the date of publication of the procedures in the Federal Register. Authority and Signature David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7. Signed at Washington, DC, on September 16, 2015. David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 2015-24107 Filed 9-21-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
![57222 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices
TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date
86,102 .......... Vonage America, Inc., Payment Processing Team, Beeline, Horton Holmdel, NJ .......................... June 16, 2014.
Works, Cognizant, and Bravo.
86,122 .......... Hospira—Clayton, Kelly Services, Accentuate Staffing, NStar Global Clayton, NC .......................... June 23, 2014.
Services, etc.
86,123 .......... Bombardier Transportation (Holdings) USA, Inc., Bombardier, Inc., Bom- Pittsburgh, PA ...................... June 9, 2014.
bardier, Systems, PPC, & RCS, Adecco, etc.
86,132 .......... Getinge Sourcing, LLC, Getinge AB .......................................................... Rochester, NY ...................... February 21, 2015.
86,132A ....... C1 Search and First Consulting, Inc., Working on Site at Getinge Rochester, NY ...................... June 25, 2014.
Sourcing, LLC, Getinge AB.
86,133 .......... Capital Group Companies Global, Information Technology Group, San Antonio, TX ................... June 10, 2014.
KForce, Pinpoint Resource Group, etc.
Determinations Terminating required by Section 221 of the Act (19 workers are covered by active
Investigations of Petitions for Worker U.S.C. 2271), the Department initiated certifications. Consequently, further
Adjustment Assistance investigations of these petitions. investigation in these cases would serve
After notice of the petitions was The following determinations no purpose since the petitioning group
published in the Federal Register and terminating investigations were issued of workers cannot be covered by more
on the Department’s Web site, as because the petitioning groups of than one certification at a time.
TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date
85,998 .......... Baker Hughes Incorporated ....................................................................... Hampton, AR.
86,032 .......... TRC Staffing Services, Inc., Teleflex ......................................................... Atlanta, GA.
I hereby certify that the addition, OSHA proposes to adopt new hours of operation for the OSHA Docket
aforementioned determinations were streamlined procedures for accepting Office are 8:15 a.m.–4:45 p.m., e.t.
issued during the period of July 27, 2015 and reviewing applications of 4. Instructions: All submissions must
through August 24, 2015. These organizations seeking to obtain, renew, include the Agency name and the OSHA
determinations are available on the or expand NRTL recognition. docket number (OSHA–2007–0031).
Department’s Web site www.tradeact/ DATES: Submit comments, information, OSHA places comments and other
taa/taa_search_form.cfm under the and documents in response to this materials, including any personal
searchable listing of determinations or notice, or requests for an extension of information, in the public docket
by calling the Office of Trade time to make a submission, on or before without revision, and these materials
Adjustment Assistance toll free at 888– October 22, 2015. may be available online at http://
365–6822. ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the
Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of the following methods: Agency cautions commenters about
August 2015. 1. Electronically: Submit comments submitting statements they do not want
Del Min Amy Chen, and attachments electronically at made available to the public, or
http://www.regulations.gov, which is submitting comments that contain
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance. the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow personal information (either about
the instructions online for making themselves or others) such as Social
[FR Doc. 2015–24003 Filed 9–21–15; 8:45 am]
electronic submissions. Security numbers, birth dates, and
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
2. Facsimile: If submissions, medical data.
including attachments, are not longer 5. Docket: To read or download
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR than 10 pages, commenters may fax submissions or other material in the
them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov
Occupational Safety and Health 693–1648. or to the OSHA Docket Office at the
Administration 3. Regular or express mail, hand address above. All documents in the
delivery, or messenger (courier) service: docket are listed in the http://
[Docket No. OSHA–2007–0031] Submit comments, requests, and any www.regulations.gov index; however,
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, some information (e.g., copyrighted
Nationally Recognized Testing
Docket No. OSHA–2007–0031, material) is not publicly available to
Laboratories; Proposed Revised Fee
Technical Data Center, U.S. Department read or download through the Web site.
Schedule and Proposed Adoption of
of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., All submissions, including copyrighted
New Application Acceptance and
Room N–2625, Washington, DC 20210; material, are available for inspection at
Review Procedures
telephone: (202) 693–2350 (TTY the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health number: (877) 889–5627). Note that OSHA Docket Office for assistance in
Administration (OSHA), Labor. security procedures may result in locating docket submissions.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION: Notice. significant delays in receiving 6. Extension of comment period:
comments and other written materials Submit requests for an extension of the
SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA proposes by regular mail. Contact the OSHA comment period on or before October 7,
to revise the schedule of fees that the Docket Office for information about 2015 to the Office of Technical
Agency charges to Nationally security procedures concerning delivery Programs and Coordination Activities,
Recognized Testing Laboratories of materials by express mail, hand Directorate of Technical Support and
(NRTLs) and NRTL applicants. In delivery, or messenger service. The Emergency Management, Occupational
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices 57223
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. applying for NRTL recognition to OSHA has routinely followed in
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution provide, in their applications, detailed accepting applications.
Avenue NW., Room N–3655, and comprehensive information about OSHA proposes the adoption of the
Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to their programs, processes, and new streamlined procedures to
(202) 693–1644. procedures, in writing. When an eliminate delays caused by multiple
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: organization makes an initial revisions by an applicant during the
Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank application to be recognized as an application-acceptance and -review
Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of NRTL, OSHA reviews the written process. In addition, OSHA seeks to
Communications, U.S. Department of information contained in the simplify the application process to make
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., organization’s application and conducts it clearer when the application
Room N–3647, Washington, DC 20210; an on-site assessment to determine acceptance process ends and the
telephone: (202) 693–1999; email: whether the organization meets the substantive application review process
meilinger.francis2@dol.gov. requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA begins. This streamlined application
General and technical information: uses a similar process when an NRTL process would also reduce NRTL
Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson, Director, applies for expansion or renewal of its Program fees, as OSHA will discuss
Office of Technical Programs and recognition, although the type and later in this notice.
amount of information in some areas The existing procedures for
Coordination Activities, Directorate of
can differ significantly from those of application acceptance and review are
Technical Support and Emergency
initial applications. In addition, the contained in both Appendix A to the
Management, Occupational Safety and
Agency conducts annual assessments 1 NRTL Program regulations (‘‘Appendix
Health Administration, U.S. Department
of NRTLs to ensure that the recognized A’’) and the NRTL Program Directive.
of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., OSHA does not propose, in this notice,
Room N–3655, Washington, DC 20210; laboratories adequately maintain their
programs and continue to meet the to revise Appendix A; instead, as stated,
phone: (202) 693–2110 or email: OSHA proposes to follow new
robinson.kevin@dol.gov. recognition requirements.
streamlined procedures in lieu of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To support these core functions,
existing procedures in the Directive.
OSHA also performs a number of
I. Introduction The new streamlined procedures would
ancillary activities. For example, OSHA:
be consistent with, and would clarify,
OSHA proposes to adopt new Investigates complaints filed against
the procedures contained in Appendix
streamlined procedures for accepting NRTLs to ensure that the laboratories
A.
and reviewing applications of are performing their testing and
organizations seeking to obtain, renew, certification functions adequately; A. Existing Procedures in Appendix A
or expand NRTL recognition, and to represents the NRTL Program in a That Are Not Subject to Revision in This
revise the existing NRTL Program fee variety of forums related to conformity Notice
schedule pursuant to the NRTL Program assessment products used in the Per Appendix A, the burden is
regulation, 29 CFR 1910.7(f). Section III workplace; and maintains a detailed generally ‘‘on the applicant to establish
of this notice covers the proposed Web site that both explains the program by a preponderance of the evidence that
adoption of new application acceptance and, more importantly for the NRTLs, it is entitled to recognition as an NRTL’’
and review procedures, and Section IV lists all the laboratories currently (App. A. Introduction). Thus, in its
covers the proposed revision of the fee recognized under the NRTL Program, application, an applicant must ‘‘provide
schedule. the products each laboratory can test, sufficient information and detail
and registered certification marks used demonstrating that it meets the
II. Background on the NRTL Program by each laboratory. requirements set forth in § 1910.7, in
Many of OSHA’s safety standards III. Proposed Revision of Existing order for an informed decision
(e.g., 29 CFR 1910, Subpart S) require Application Acceptance and Review concerning recognition to be made’’ by
that equipment and products be tested Procedures the Assistant Secretary for Occupational
and certified to help ensure their safe Safety and Health (‘‘Assistant
use in the workplace. To implement OSHA currently has a number of Secretary’’), and must also ‘‘identify the
these requirements, OSHA established initiatives underway to improve the scope of the NRTL-related activity for
the NRTL Program and the Agency operations of the NRTL Program. This which the applicant wishes to be
generally requires NRTLs to perform section of the notice discusses one such recognized’’ (i.e., the test standards the
this testing and certification. initiative, under which OSHA proposes applicant will use for testing products)
The NRTL Program regulation, 29 new streamlined procedures for (App. A.I.A.2.b). To meet its burden, the
CFR 1910.7, requires that, to obtain and accepting and reviewing applications of applicant may include any
retain OSHA recognition as an NRTL, an organizations seeking to obtain, renew, documentation (i.e., enclosures,
organization must: (1) Have the or expand NRTL recognition. OSHA attachments, or exhibits) it deems
appropriate capability to test, evaluate, would follow these new procedures in appropriate (App. A.I.A.2.c).
and approve products to assure their lieu of those contained in the Agency’s Also under Appendix A,
safe use in the workplace; (2) be existing NRTL Program Directive (CPL ‘‘[a]pplications submitted by eligible
completely independent of employers 1–0.3, NRTL Program Policies, testing agencies will be accepted by
subject to the tested equipment Procedures, and Guidelines, December OSHA, and their receipt acknowledged
requirements and manufacturers and 2, 1999) (‘‘Directive’’ or ‘‘NRTL Program in writing’’ (App. A.I.B.1.a). Moreover,
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
vendors of products for which OSHA Directive’’) and the additional practices ‘‘[a]fter receipt of an application, OSHA
requires certification; (3) have internal may request additional information if it
programs that ensure proper control of 1 OSHA uses the term ‘‘assessments’’ to mean believes information relevant to the
the testing and certification process; and those activities described by the term ‘‘audits’’ requirements for recognition has been
under 29 CFR 1910.7(f). OSHA uses the term
(4) have effective reporting and ‘‘assessments,’’ rather than ‘‘audits’’ because it
omitted’’ (Id.). In addition, ‘‘OSHA
complaint handling procedures (29 CFR better reflects the overall purpose of the program’s shall, as necessary, conduct an on-site
1910.7(b)). OSHA requires organizations activities, i.e., conformity assessments. review of the testing facilities of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/2.svg)
![57224 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices
applicant, as well as the applicant’s Directive, OSHA staff ‘‘formally accept approved extension of these
administrative and technical practices, or reject the application’’ based on a deadline(s),’’ OSHA ‘‘sends a letter
and, if necessary, review any additional review of the application for notifying the applicant that the
documentation underlying the ‘‘completeness and for adequacy’’ application is not accepted and the Case
application’’ (App. A.I.B.1.b). (Directive Ch.2.V.B, Ch. 3.II.B.1). The File is closed’’ (Directive Ch. 3.II.C.2).
Appendix A provides the responsible procedures for this review are contained Finally, the Directive provides that,
OSHA staff with two options following in Appendix D to the Directive
review of the application, and any after an application is accepted, ‘‘the
(Directive Ch. 3.II.B.1). An application
additional information and on-site assigned staff determines whether an
is considered complete ‘‘if it contains all
review report. On the one hand, if ‘‘the on-site review is necessary’’ (Directive
necessary documents, and sufficient
applicant appears to have met the information for all relevant items,’’ and Ch.3.II.D). However, the Directive also
requirements for recognition,’’ is considered adequate ‘‘if the provides for non-acceptance during the
responsible OSHA staff must make a information submitted sufficiently on-site review process, if an applicant
‘‘positive finding’’ to the Assistant demonstrates that the requirements for fails to respond adequately to the
Secretary, which consists of ‘‘a written recognition can be met, and where findings of an on-site review (Directive
recommendation . . . that the relevant, if at least one test standard Ch.4.IV.C).
application be approved, accompanied requested can be approved’’ (Directive Under OSHA’s proposal, it would no
by a supporting explanation’’ (App. App. D) (emphasis in original). longer follow the existing procedures,
A.I.B.2). Once this recommendation is In reviewing the application, OSHA described above, to afford applicants
made, OSHA follows the procedures in staff will return and ‘‘take[] no further three opportunities to modify their
the Appendix for making preliminary action’’ on an application ‘‘[i]f [the] applications before acceptance or non-
and final findings on the application application is frivolous or grossly acceptance. This existing procedure is
(App. A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6). incomplete or inadequate.’’ In such inefficient and causes delays because, in
On the other hand, if ‘‘the applicant circumstances, ‘‘any future application some cases, these multiple
does not appear to have met the from the applicant’’ will be processed opportunities cause the process to take
requirements for recognition,’’ ‘‘as a new application’’ (Directive Ch. years. OSHA would also not follow its
responsible OSHA staff must make a 3.II.A). existing procedure for accepting an
‘‘negative finding’’ to the ‘‘applicant in If the application is not ‘‘frivolous or
application only when it is found to be
writing, listing the specific requirements grossly incomplete or inadequate,’’
complete and adequate. This existing
of § 1910.7 and [Appendix A] which the OSHA staff discusses its review with the
procedure has caused confusion as to
applicant has not met, and allow[ing] a applicant, ‘‘noting any deficiencies
when the application acceptance
reasonable period for response’’ (App. found or clarifications needed’’
A.I.B.3.a). After the applicant receives (Directive Ch. 3.II.B.2). If the process ends and the substantive
‘‘a notification of negative finding (i.e., ‘‘application is determined to be application review process begins.
for intended disapproval of the complete and adequate,’’ OSHA ‘‘sends C. OSHA Proposes new Streamlined
application), and within the response a letter to the applicant to accept the Procedures for Accepting and Reviewing
period provided,’’ the applicant may application’’ (Directive Ch. 3.II.C). Applications
either (1) ‘‘[s]ubmit a revised If the application is determined to be
application for further review, which incomplete or inadequate, the Directive In lieu of the existing NRTL Program
could result in a positive finding’’ (the provides two opportunities for Directive procedures, described above,
procedures for which are explained in applicants to correct deficiencies before OSHA proposes to follow streamlined
the previous paragraph), or (2) rejection of an application (Directive Ch. procedures for accepting and reviewing
‘‘[r]equest that the original application 3.II.C). In practice, however, OSHA has applications. These streamlined
be submitted to the Assistant Secretary given applicants three such procedures would reduce delays, fees,
with an attached statement of reasons, opportunities. Per the Directive, OSHA and confusion associated with
supplied by the applicant of why the ‘‘sends a letter to the applicant, application processing. Under these
application should be approved’’ (App. detailing the deficiencies and the streamlined procedures, OSHA would
A.I.B.3.b.i). In either case (i.e., if a additional information needed and review an application for completeness,
positive finding is made on a revised requesting a response by an appropriate but not adequacy, in deciding whether
application or if the applicant requests deadline,’’ and if ‘‘the response does not to accept the application. OSHA’s
that the original application be adequately resolve the deficiencies,’’ review for adequacy, and any on-site
submitted to the Assistant Secretary), OSHA ‘‘provides the applicant a review, would occur only after OSHA
OSHA would follow the procedures in [second] opportunity to respond within accepted the application. Furthermore,
the Appendix for making preliminary a given period.’’ (Directive Ch. 3.II.C.) If OSHA would permit the applicant one
and final findings on the application deficiencies remain after the second opportunity only, rather than three, to
(App. A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6). The opportunity, OSHA, in practice, gives resolve deficiencies in the completeness
‘‘procedure for applicant notification applicants a third, but relatively limited, of its application before deciding
and potential revision shall be used opportunity to make corrections before whether to accept it. OSHA describes
only once during each recognition the effective date of the rejection. This these proposed streamlined procedures
process’’ (App. A.I.B.3.b.ii). limited duration is sufficient for in more detail, below.
applicants to correct deficiencies if only
B. OSHA Proposes That It Will No a few critical deficiencies remain. 1. Initial Review and Acceptance
Longer Follow Existing NRTL Program
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
If an applicant’s timely response cures
Directive Procedures for Accepting and the deficiencies in its application, When it receives an application,
Reviewing Applications OSHA ‘‘sends an acceptance letter to the OSHA would acknowledge its receipt,
Existing policies contained in the applicant’’ (Directive Ch. 3.II.C). establish (for initial applications) or
NRTL Program Directive expand on the However, ‘‘[i]f the applicant does not update (for expansion and renewal
application procedures contained in respond adequately or fails to reply by applications) the docket for the
Appendix A, as follows. Per the any deadline(s) provided or an organization, and upload the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices 57225
application materials to the docket.2 all deficiencies found in its application recommendation for a negative finding
OSHA would perform an administrative and/or during the assessment, and after a review of a revised application,
review of the application to determine provide evidence to OSHA that the or the applicant requests that the
whether it is complete (i.e., has corrections have been implemented into original application be submitted to the
sufficient information to determine the applicant’s or NRTL’s management Assistant Secretary, OSHA would
whether the applicant meets the systems. In that case, OSHA would follow the procedures in Appendix A
requirements for recognition). If not conclude the application is adequate. for making preliminary and final
complete, OSHA would notify the On the other hand, if OSHA finds that findings on the application (App.
applicant, in writing, that it has 30 days deficiencies remain, OSHA would A.I.B.4, A.I.B.5, A.I.B.6).
from the date of the notice to provide conclude the application is not
the missing or additional information. adequate. IV. Proposed Revision of the NRTL
OSHA would also inform the applicant, If OSHA staff determines an Program Fee Schedule
in the notice, that it is unable to review application is adequate, OSHA would A. Background
the merits of the application because the follow existing procedures, and
recommend a positive finding, per OSHA proposes to revise the existing
application itself does not contain
Appendix A.I.B.2. Otherwise, OSHA NRTL Program fee schedule pursuant to
sufficient information to show that the
staff would notify the applicant in the NRTL Program regulation, 29 CFR
requirements for recognition can be met.
writing that they intend to recommend 1910.7(f). That regulation requires
Finally, OSHA would inform the
a negative finding. In that case, the NRTLs and applicants to ‘‘pay fees for
applicant, in the notice, that this review
applicant has two options under services provided by OSHA in advance
involved no technical determination,
Appendix A.I.B.3. First, the applicant of the provision of those services’’ (29
only an administrative one of whether
the application has all of the necessary has one additional chance to revise its CFR 1910.7(f)(1)). OSHA assesses fees
documentation. If the applicant does not application within 30 days of receipt of for core service activities, that is, for
respond by the 30-day deadline, or does OSHA’s written notice. Second, the ‘‘[p]rocessing of applications for initial
not adequately respond, and the applicant may request that its original recognition, expansion of recognition, or
application remains incomplete, OSHA application (as supplemented in renewal of recognition, including on-
would inform the applicant that OSHA response during the review for site reviews; review and evaluation of
cannot accept the application, and the adequacy) be submitted to the Assistant the applications; and preparation of
applicant must reapply. If the applicant Secretary (also within 30 days of receipt reports, evaluations and Federal
provides a complete application within of OSHA’s written notice). In this case, Register notices;’’ and ‘‘[a]udits of sites’’
the 30 days, or provided a complete the applicant must attach a statement of (Id.). OSHA’s fee schedule ‘‘reflects the
application when it was first received, reasons to the application explaining full cost of performing the activities’’ for
OSHA would accept the application. why the application should be these services (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(2)).
approved. OSHA would consider the OSHA calculates fees ‘‘based on either
2. Determination of Adequacy failure to submit a revised application the average or actual time required to
After accepting the application, or a request that the original application perform the work necessary; the staff
OSHA would review the merits of the be submitted to the Assistant Secretary costs per hour (which include wages,
application to determine whether the within the 30-day deadline to be a fringe benefits, and expenses other than
application is adequate. OSHA would withdrawal of the application. travel for personnel that perform or
first conduct a technical review of the If the applicant opts to revise its administer the activities covered by the
application (i.e., a detailed review of all application, OSHA would invoice the fees); and the average or actual costs for
of the application’s administrative and applicant for the fee to review its travel when on-site reviews are
technical procedures and content). revised submission. This fee would involved’’ (Id.). Thus, the formula for
Following this technical review, OSHA equal the estimated hours for the review calculating a fee for an activity is the
would determine whether to conduct an multiplied by the hourly rate for the ‘‘[Average (or Actual) Hours to
on-site assessment as part of evaluating applicable Miscellaneous Fee in the Complete the Activity × Staff Costs per
the management system and technical NRTL Program’s fee schedule. Like Hour] + Average (or Actual) Travel
capabilities of the organization. OSHA other application fees, this review fee Costs’’ (Id.).
would generally conduct an on-site would not be refundable. The applicant OSHA periodically reviews the full
review for initial applications and for would need to pay this fee before OSHA costs of performing core services and, if
expansion applications that involve new performs the review of the revised warranted, will propose a revised fee
areas of testing for the NRTL or areas of application. OSHA would consider a schedule in the Federal Register (29
concern to OSHA. If OSHA finds failure to pay the fee within 30 days of CFR 1910.7(f)(3), (f)(4)). If OSHA
deficiencies during the technical review receipt of the invoice as a withdrawal of approves the proposed fee schedule
or during the on-site assessment, OSHA the application. When OSHA receives (after giving the public an opportunity
would provide the applicant with an the fee, OSHA would review the revised to comment), it ‘‘publish[es] the final fee
explanation of deficiencies and needed application to determine whether to schedule in the Federal Register,
corrections, and a 90-day opportunity to sustain the negative finding or change it making the fee schedule effective on a
respond. Failure to respond by the 90- to a positive one. If OSHA staff decides specific date’’ (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(3),
day deadline would constitute a to sustain the recommendation for a (f)(4)).
withdrawal of the application, and negative finding, they would first afford To ensure that its fees for core
OSHA would take no further action on the applicant the opportunity to services reflect the full cost of those
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
it. If the applicant or NRTL responds, it withdraw the application. If the services, OSHA’s existing fee schedule
would need to demonstrate it corrected applicant does not withdraw it, OSHA (which OSHA adopted in 2011) takes
would proceed with the preliminary into account both the direct and indirect
2 As currently used by OSHA, the term ‘‘docket’’
finding. costs it incurs in performing those
means an electronic file folder containing Once OSHA staff recommends a services (76 FR 10501–10504). Direct
documents that pertain to an official action taken
by the Agency. OSHA generally makes these positive finding on either an original or costs include staff costs (i.e. the
documents available to the public. revised application, sustains its applicable portion of the salaries and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/4.svg)
![57226 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices
fringe benefits of the applicable staff) represent the total work hours spent on The existing approach depends, in
incurred for application processing and those core activities than the 2000 large measure, on OSHA estimating an
assessment (Id.). Ancillary (or indirect) equation 3 (Id.). accurate TAS (i.e., number of ‘‘billable’’
costs include staff costs incurred for the core hours). If this estimate is accurate,
B. Explanation of Proposed Revision of
administration and support of the the ECR (i.e., the hourly rate OSHA
program, including legal support, Fee Schedule
charges for services) will accurately
budgeting, policy matters, intragency OSHA has reviewed its existing fee reflect the full cost of services (because
and international coordination, schedule and, based on that review, ECR = TPC/TAS). But OSHA’s estimate
responses to requests for information proposes to revise its fee schedule. This has not been accurate in practice. Due
related to the program, handling proposed fee schedule would more in part to insufficient program staffing
complaints, Web site development and accurately reflect the full cost of and other uncontrollable factors, the
maintenance, and participation in performing the activities for which staff has been unable to work the
meetings with stakeholders and outside OSHA charges fees. number of estimated billable hours. This
interest groups (Id.). OSHA refers to the OSHA proposes the following: has resulted in an hourly rate charged
sum of its direct costs and ancillary 1. OSHA proposes a new grouping of by OSHA that results in fees that are far
costs as the total program costs (TPC) for fees for each of the core activities for lower than the fees OSHA would be
the purpose of this notice. TPC does not which OSHA charges fees to NRTLs charging if its estimate had been
include travel expenses, which are (i.e., ‘‘[p]rocessing of applications for accurate.
assessed separately (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(2), initial recognition, expansion of OSHA could reassess TAS on a
76 FR 10504 n.5). recognition, or renewal of recognition, regular basis to achieve a more accurate
In the existing fee schedule, OSHA including on-site reviews; review and estimate. However, due to the changing
calculates the fee for each core service evaluation of the applications; and nature of the staff’s workload, OSHA
activity by multiplying an equivalent preparation of reports, evaluations and likely would need to make such
average cost per hour rate (ECR) by the Federal Register notices;’’ and ‘‘[a]udits calculation adjustments, and thus
time it takes to perform that activity: Fee of sites’’ (29 CFR 1910.7(f)(1)). Under publish fee schedules, more than once
for Activity = ECR × Time for Activity the existing fee schedule, OSHA groups within a given year to ensure an
(76 FR 10504). In 2000, when OSHA these activities under the terms accurate estimate. OSHA likely could
began assessing fees for services, OSHA Application Processing, Audits, and not make such adjustments in a timely
explained that it derived that fee Miscellaneous (76 FR 10508). Under manner, largely due to the length of the
schedule’s ECR by dividing TPC by the OSHA’s proposed fee schedule, shown process for issuing fee schedules.
total available annual work hours of the below in Table A, OSHA would group OSHA proposes to simplify the
NRTL Program and legal staff that these activities under the terms: existing calculation; for the purpose of
perform the services (TAW) (Id.). Administrative Evaluation, Technical the fees proposed in this notice, OSHA
Accordingly, ECR2000 = TPC2000/ Evaluation, Assessments, Federal would assume that certain NRTL
TAW2000. The approach used in 2000 Register Notices, and Miscellaneous Program staff (which OSHA calls ‘‘direct
resulted in fees that recouped the costs (which includes late fees and other staff’’ in this notice) work exclusively
only of the time spent actually activities not specifically described). on core billable activities, and that other
performing individualized audits and OSHA proposes these new groupings to NRTL Program staff (which OSHA calls
application processing, which is only a align its fee schedule with the proposed
portion of TAW, and did not recoup the ‘‘indirect staff’’ in this notice) work
streamlined procedures for accepting exclusively on ancillary activities.
costs of the time associated with and reviewing applications, described
running the program and providing Under the proposal, OSHA would
above. OSHA also believes that the calculate the ECR (ECR2015) by
other benefits shared among all NRTLs times it proposes estimating for
(Id.). dividing TPC by total direct staff annual
completion of these activities (see paid (i.e., compensable) hours, or
To account for the costs associated
Tables 2 thru 5, below) more accurately simply, direct staff annual hours (DSH).
with these shared benefits, OSHA
represent the actual time it takes to Because of the difficulties of
adopted a new approach for calculating
complete the core activities for which implementing the existing approach,
ECR (ECR2011) in the existing fee
OSHA charges fees. Therefore, adoption OSHA believes the proposed change in
schedule (Id.). Under the new approach,
of the proposed groupings would more approach (replacing TAS with DSH)
OSHA divides the estimated total cost of
accurately reflect the full cost of the would, on average and in practice, more
the NRTL Program (TPC2011) by the
services for which fees are assessed. accurately reflect the full cost of
total annual service hours (TAS2011)
(Id.). This latter term equals the total 2. OSHA proposes to revise the services for which OSHA charges fees
estimated work hours that the NRTL approach it uses to calculate ECR. than the existing approach. The
Program staff spend on the core service Again, under the existing approach, accuracy of the DSH approach also does
activities for which OSHA would bill OSHA calculates ECR by dividing TPC not depend on the variable workload of
NRTLs; accordingly, ECR2011 = by the total estimated work hours that staff, and would therefore be simpler to
TPC2011/TAS2011 (Id.). By way of the NRTL Program staff and legal staff implement than the existing approach.
comparison with the 2000 fee schedule, spend on the core service activities for OSHA estimates for the proposal that
TAS equals TAW minus estimated which OSHA bills NRTLs (or TAS) (76 four full-time NRTL Program staff
hours spent on ancillary activities (AH) FR 10504). members are direct staff and the other
and leave (LH) (i.e., TAS = TAW ¥ AH 3 The existing fee schedule was supposed to have
full-time NRTL Program staff member is
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
¥ LH) (Id.). By continuing to include been phased in over a three-year phase-in period.
indirect staff. OSHA believes the
the full program costs in the numerator (76 FR 10508). OSHA implemented the first phase estimate of four full-time direct staff is
(TPC2011), but including in the on March 28, 2011. However, due to other priorities reasonable because OSHA projects a
denominator (TAS2011) only the and factors, OSHA was unable to implement the significant increase in the number of
second and third phases of the increase, as planned.
amount of time spent on providing The revised fee schedule OSHA proposes in the
applications the NRTL Program will
‘‘billable’’ core services, OSHA believed current notice would render moot the process and audits the NRTL Program
the revised ECR would more accurately implementation of the second and third phases. will perform (i.e., a significant increase
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 183 / Tuesday, September 22, 2015 / Notices 57231
pertinent written documents and DEPARTMENT OF LABOR docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov
exhibits. Commenters needing more or the OSHA Docket Office at the
time to comment must submit a request Occupational Safety and Health address above. All documents in the
in writing, stating the reasons for the Administration docket (including this Federal Register
request. Commenters must submit [Docket No. OSHA–2012–0014] notice) are listed in the http://
comments or requests for extensions by www.regulations.gov index; however,
the due dates, and follow all The Lead in Construction Standard; some information (e.g., copyrighted
instructions for submitting comments Extension of the Office of Management material) is not publicly available to
and requests for extensions, specified in and Budget’s (OMB) Approval of read or download from the Web site. All
the DATES and ADDRESSES sections of Information Collection (Paperwork) submissions, including copyrighted
this notice. OSHA will limit any Requirements material, are available for inspection
extension to 10 days unless the and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health You also may contact Theda Kenney at
requester justifies a longer period. Administration (OSHA), Labor. the address below to obtain a copy of
OSHA may deny a request for an ACTION: Request for public comments. the ICR.
extension if the request is not
SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
adequately justified.
comments concerning its proposal to Theda Kenney or Todd Owen,
OSHA staff will review all timely- extend the Office of Management and Directorate of Standards and Guidance,
submitted comments to the docket and, Budget’s (OMB) approval of the OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room
after addressing the issues raised by information collection requirements N–3609, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
timely-submitted comments, will contained in the Lead in Construction Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
recommend to the Assistant Secretary Standard (29 CFR 1926.62). 693–2222.
for Occupational Safety and Health DATES: Comments must be submitted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
whether to adopt the proposed NRTL (postmarked, sent, or received) by
Program fee schedule and new I. Background
November 23, 2015.
streamlined procedures for accepting ADDRESSES:
The Department of Labor, as part of its
and reviewing applications. The Agency Electronically: You may submit continuing effort to reduce paperwork
will publish a final fee schedule in the comments and attachments and respondent (i.e., employer) burden,
Federal Register, as provided under 29 electronically at http:// conducts a preclearance consultation
CFR 1910.7, as well as a final decision www.regulations.gov, which is the program to provide the public with an
on whether to adopt the new Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the opportunity to comment on proposed
streamlined procedures for accepting instructions online for submitting and continuing collection of
and reviewing applications. The final comments. information requirements in accord
fee schedule would become effective 30 Facsimile: If your comments, with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
days after the date of publication of the including attachments, are not longer 1995 (PRA–95) (44 U.S.C.
schedule in the Federal Register, and than 10 pages you may fax them to the 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures
OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648. that information is in the desired
the final streamlined procedures for
Mail, hand delivery, express mail, format, reporting burden (time and
accepting and reviewing applications
messenger, or courier service: When costs) is minimal, collection
would become effective on the date of instruments are clearly understood, and
using this method, you must submit
publication of the procedures in the OSHA’s estimate of the information
your comments and attachments to the
Federal Register. collection burden is accurate. The
OSHA Docket Office, Docket No.
Authority and Signature OSHA–2012–0014, Occupational Safety Occupational Safety and Health Act of
and Health Administration, U.S. 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Department of Labor, Room N–2625, seq.) authorizes information collection
Assistant Secretary of Labor for 200 Constitution Avenue NW., by employers as necessary or
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries appropriate for enforcement of the OSH
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, (hand, express mail, messenger, and Act or for developing information
DC 20210, authorized the preparation of courier service) are accepted during the regarding the causes and prevention of
this notice. Accordingly, the Agency is Department of Labor’s and Docket occupational injuries, illnesses, and
issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Office’s normal business hours, 8:15 accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor’s Order No. a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t. also requires that OSHA obtain such
1–2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012), and Instructions: All submissions must information with minimum burden
29 CFR 1910.7. include the Agency name and the OSHA upon employers, especially those
docket number (OSHA–2012–0014) for operating small businesses, and to
Signed at Washington, DC, on September the Information Collection Request reduce to the maximum extent feasible
16, 2015. unnecessary duplication of efforts in
(ICR). All comments, including any
David Michaels, personal information you provide, are obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational placed in the public docket without The purpose of the Lead in
Safety and Health. change, and may be made available Construction Standard and its collection
[FR Doc. 2015–24107 Filed 9–21–15; 8:45 am] online at http://www.regulations.gov. of information (paperwork)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P For further information on submitting requirements is to reduce occupational
comments see the ‘‘Public lead exposure in the construction
Participation’’ heading in the section of industry. Lead exposure can result in
this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY both acute and chronic effects and can
INFORMATION. be fatal in severe cases of lead toxicity.
Docket: To read or download Some of the health effects associated
comments or other material in the with lead exposure include brain
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:39 Sep 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM 22SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_57405/page/10.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 09:35:11
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 09:35:11
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on or before October 22, 2015. | |
| Contact | Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 57222 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR