DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1926

[Docket No. S-775]

RIN No. 1218-AA65

Safety Standards for Steel Erection

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

ACTION: Notice of public meeting; Appointment of members to advisory committee; and organizational meeting of advisory committee.

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is announcing that a meeting of all parties interested in the Steel Erection Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee (SENRAC) will be held to promote an understanding of the negotiated rulemaking process and to announce the selection of the Advisory Committee.

In addition, immediately following the informational meeting, an organizational meeting of SENRAC will take place. Members will be sworn in and the committee will be charged with its duties and will address certain procedural matters. These meetings will be open to the public.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on June 15, 16 and 17, 1994. The informational meeting will begin at 10 a.m. on June 15, and the organizational meeting of the Committee will begin at 1 p.m. on June 16, 1994.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in the Waterford Room on June 15 and 16 and the Haverford Room on June 17 of the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Bethesda, Maryland; Telephone (301) 657-1234.

Any written comments in response to this notice should be sent, in quadruplicate, to the following address: Docket Office, Docket S-775, room N-2625, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; Telephone (202) 219-7894.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James F. Foster, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Information and Consumer Affairs, room N-3647, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; Telephone: (202) 219-8151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Existing subpart R of part 1926 (1926.750 through 1926.752) contains safety standards that apply specifically to steel erection activities. These provisions include construction specifications, work practices and requirements related to fall protection.

Since 1974, OSHA has received requests for clarification of various provisions of subpart R, especially provisions regarding the fall protection requirements, because other subparts of the construction safety and health standards address fall protection. In 1984, the Agency began drafting a proposed rule to update and clarify subpart R. OSHA met with its Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH), and sought the Committee's advice on the draft regulation.

On November 25, 1986, OSHA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for subpart M (the general fall protection standard for construction work) (51 FR 42718). At that time, the Agency stated that it intended to apply subpart M to certain steel erection activities. Subsequently, the Agency decided (53 FR 2052) that the revised subpart M would not apply when workers were engaged in the erection of steel framed buildings. Instead a separate rulemaking on subpart R would be undertaken. OSHA circulated draft proposals of subpart R reflecting this decision.

In response, several interested parties requested that OSHA institute negotiated rulemaking for subpart R. OSHA retained an independent consultant to review the fall protection issues raised by the draft revisions of subpart R, render an independent opinion and to recommend a course of action. In 1991, the consultant recommended that OSHA address the issue of fall protection as well as other potential revisions of subpart R by using the negotiated rulemaking process.

Based on this recommendation and continued requests for negotiated rulemaking, on December 29, 1992, OSHA published a Federal Register notice of intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee (57 FR 61860). The notice requested nominations for membership on the Committee and comments on the appropriateness of using negotiated rulemaking to develop a steel erection proposed rule. In addition, the notice described the negotiated rulemaking process and identified some key issues for negotiation. To promote understanding of this process, OSHA has edited and republished some of these discussions as appendices to this notice.

In response to the notice of intent, OSHA received over 225 submissions from the identified interests, including over 60 nominations for membership on the Committee and several sets of comments. After an evaluation of the submissions, it was apparent that an overwhelming majority of commenters supported this action and OSHA has decided to go forward with the negotiated rulemaking process. The Agency has selected the members of the Committee from these nominations.

The Agency has hired Philip J. Harter, Esq. as Facilitator for the negotiated rulemaking Committee. The primary functions of the Facilitator will be to chair the meetings of the Committee in an impartial manner and assist the members of the Committee in conducting discussions and negotiations.

OSHA has decided that a meeting of all interested parties should be held to promote a better understanding of the negotiated rulemaking process and to initiate the structuring of the negotiations. The meeting will be chaired by the newly appointed Facilitator.

In addition, immediately following the public meeting, an organizational meeting of SENRAC will be held. Members will be sworn in, the committee will be charged with its duties and then will address certain procedural matters, including proposed Ground Rules. Other procedural issues will include agreement on dates, times, and locations of future meetings, and identification and determination of how best to address principal issues for resolution. This meeting will be open to the public.

II. Agenda for the Public Meeting

Following registration and assembly, the Facilitator will offer an overview of negotiated rulemaking (Neg/Reg). Interest based negotiation will be contrasted with the usual development of a proposed rule. The advantages of using Neg/Reg, where practical decisionmaking results in a rule that can be more stringent, but, at the same time, easier and less expensive to implement, will be discussed. Other topics addressed will be working with caucuses and the "Wedge" concept, where the member at the table represents a much broader constituency and is expected to funnel information both ways. The very important role of workgroups, composed of both members and other interested parties, working out technical problems and performing drafting and analysis tasks will be discussed. It should be noted that workgroups, while reflecting the deliberations of the Committee, do not make policy decisions. The Facilitator will announce the establishment of an electronic bulletin board for this Neg/Reg. The purpose of the electronic bulletin board is to decrease the amount of paper and paperwork while increasing communication between and among members and the public. During the meeting the Facilitator may provide opportunities for questions and caucus meetings.

The Facilitator will also announce the selection of the Committee. He will discuss: the variety of interests and the potential representatives of those interests; the difficulty in selecting the Committee members and the basis for these selections; and the criteria used in assessing whether to go forward with a Neg/Reg and the decision to go forward in Steel Erection.

The Facilitator will address the matters that must be resolved by the Committee at its first meeting, including the Ground Rules. These are the procedural rules that the Committee will adopt at its first meeting. The Agency will distribute proposed Ground Rules which address: the composition of the Committee, the use of alternates, and the essential commitment of the members to attend the meetings and participate meaningfully. The Ground Rules emphasize the importance of the members' communication with their constituencies including keeping them abreast of the negotiations, thereby limiting surprises. The goal of this negotiated rulemaking is a proposed rule and supporting documentation that all members will support. The Ground Rules will address "bargaining" in good faith to reach the goal.

The Facilitator will also identify and discuss the substantive issues to be resolved by this Committee. Here, the Facilitator is relying on the information presented to him by OSHA as well as the considerable input from the various interests during his convening efforts. The time needed for the resolution of these issues and the order of their consideration is integrally related to the development of a tentative schedule. OSHA requests that all interested parties bring their calendars to facilitate the development of a tentative schedule of committee meetings, site visits and workgroup meetings.

Interactive training sessions, under the direction of the Facilitator, will constitute the final portion of this public meeting. Topics for these training sessions will include the following: a discussion on interest based negotiations; a session illustrating how to participate in a Neg/Reg; and an explanation of how the electronic bulletin board system will aid the negotiation process. Other training activities may be added at the time of the meeting.

III. Committee Membership

Appointees to the Committee include representatives from labor, industry, public interests and government agencies. The appointees also represent groups interested in, or affected by, the outcome of the rulemaking. SENRAC is comprised of 20 members listed here alphabetically:

Richard Adams, Safety § Occupational Health Office, Department of the Army, U.S. Army Engineers District, Sacramento, Corps of Engineers, Room 960, 1325 "J" Street, Sacramento, CA 95814-2922

William Brown, Ben Hur Construction Company, 13517 Lakefront Drive, St. Louis, MO 63045-1416

Byron R. Chadwick, Regional Administrator, Region VII, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Federal Building, 1961 Stout Street, Denver, CO 80294

James E. Cole, International Association of Bridge, Structural § Ornamental Iron Workers, Suite 400, 1750 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006

Stephen D. Cooper, International Association of Bridge, Structural § Ornamental Iron Workers, Suite 400, 1750 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006

Phillip H. Cordova, El Paso Crane § Rigging Inc., 1200 Kastrin, El Paso, TX 79907

Perry A. Day, Int'l Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship, Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers § Helpers, Suite 360, 2722 Merrilee Drive, Fairfax, VA, 22031

James R. Hinson, J. Hinson Network, Inc., 1933 Davis St., Suite 268, San Leandro, CA 94577

Richard King, Black § Veatch, P.O. BOX 8405, Kansas City, MO 64114

Jim E. Lapping, Building and Construction Trades, Dept. AFL-CIO, 815 16th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006

John R. Molovich, United Steelworkers of America, Five Gateway Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Carol Murkland, Gilbane Building Company, Suite 500, 7901 Sandy Spring Road, Laurel, MD 20707

John J. Murphy, Williams Enterprises of Georgia, Inc., P.O. Box 756, Smyrna, GA 30081

Steven L. Rank, Holton § Associates, Ltd., Suite 102, 1850 Craigshire Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63146

Ray Rooth, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, California Department of Industrial Relations, Room 5202, P.O. Box 420603, San Francisco, CA 94142

Al Simmons, Council of Greater New York and Vicinity, International Association of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, 10 Ralph Avenue, Lake Grove, NY 11755

William J. Smith, International Union of Operating Engineers, 1125 Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036

Ronald Stanevich, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research, 944 Chestnut Ridge Road, Morgantown, WV 26505

C. Rockwell Turner, L.P.R. Construction, 1171 Des Moiners Avenue, Loveland, CO 80537

Eric Waterman, National Erectors Association, Suite 202, 1501 Lee Highway, Arlington, VA 22209

IV. Agenda for the Organizational Meeting of SENRAC

The meeting will be called to order. The Secretary of Labor, or his designee, will then swear in the members of the Committee and charge the Committee with its duties and goals. The Facilitator will assume the Chair and the procedural issues will be addressed by the Committee. These will include the adoption of the Ground Rules which are the procedural rules that the Committee will follow. The substantive matters must be considered in the development of a tentative schedule of committee meetings, site visits and workgroup meetings. The Committee will have to identify and discuss these matters to be resolved and determine the proper sequence of consideration as well as the location of the future meetings. OSHA will have provided proposed Ground Rules, issues, agendas (sequence of consideration), and meeting locations to committee members prior to this meeting.

V. Appendices

Included in this notice are three appendices. The text of the appendices are adopted from OSHA's notice of intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee (57 FR 61860), and are organized in the following manner: Appendix I - the elemental theory of negotiated rulemaking; Appendix II - the proposed negotiation procedures, or how the theory would be applied, in practice, to this particular Neg/Reg; and, Appendix III - the key issues that OSHA expects to be the subject for resolution in this negotiated rulemaking. Issue I is narrowed from the earlier notice to reflect the Agency's decision to limit the scope of subpart R to steel erection and not to include the erection of precast concrete or wood structures.

VI. Public Participation

All interested parties are invited to attend this public meeting at the time and place indicated above. No advanced registration is required. Seating will be available to the public on a first-come, first-served basis. Individuals with disabilities wishing to attend should contact the Facilitator to obtain appropriate accommodations no later than June 7, 1994. The opening public meeting is expected to last a day and a half; and SENRAC will be in session for an additional day and a half.

In addition, members of the general public may request an opportunity to make oral presentations to the Committee. The Facilitator of the Committee has the authority to decide to what extent oral presentations by members of the public may be permitted at the meeting. Oral presentations will be limited to statements of fact and views, and shall not include any questioning of the committee members or other participants unless these questions have been specifically approved by the Facilitator.

Part 1912 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations will apply generally. The reporting requirements of 1912.33 have been changed pursuant to 1912.42 to help meet the special needs of this Committee. Specifically, 1912.33 requires that verbatim transcripts be kept of all advisory committee meetings. Producing a coherent transcript requires a certain degree of formality. The Assistant Secretary therefore has determined pursuant to 1912.42 that such formality might interfere with the free exchange of information and ideas during the negotiations, and that the OSH Act would be better served by simply requiring detailed minutes of the proceedings without a formal transcript.

Minutes of the meetings and materials prepared for the Committee will be available for public inspection at the OSHA Docket Office, N-2625, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; Telephone (202) 219-7894.

The Facilitator, Philip J. Harter, can be reached at Suite 404, 2301 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037; telephone (202) 887-1033, FAX (202) 833-1036.

Any written comments should be directed to Docket No. S-775, and sent in quadruplicate to the following address: OSHA Docket Office, U.S. Department of Labor, room N-2625, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; Telephone (202) 219-7894.

VII. Authority

This document was prepared under the direction of Joseph A. Dear, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, pursuant to section 3 of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, 104 Stat. 4969, Title 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.; and Section 7(b) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 84 Stat. 1597, Title 29 U.S.C. 656.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of May, 1994.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

Appendix I. - The Concept of Negotiated Rulemaking

A. General

Using negotiated rulemaking to actually develop a proposed rule is fundamentally different than normal 6(b) rulemaking. Negotiated rulemaking is a process by which a proposed rule is developed by a committee composed of representatives of all the interests that will be significantly affected by the rule. Decisions are made by consensus, which generally requires concurrence among all of the interests represented.

The process is started by the Agency's careful identification of all interests potentially affected by the rulemaking under consideration.

Following receipt of the comments, the Agency establishes an advisory committee representing these various interests to negotiate a consensus on the provisions of a proposed rule. Representation on the committee may be direct, that is, each member represents a specific interest, or may be indirect, through coalitions of parties formed to represent a specific sphere of interest. The Agency is a member of the committee representing the Federal government's own set of interests.

The negotiated rulemaking (neg/reg) advisory committee is chaired by a trained mediator who facilitates the negotiation process. The role of this mediator, also called a facilitator, is to apply proven consensus building techniques to the OSHA advisory committee setting. The many functions that he will perform are discussed below.

Once a neg/reg advisory committee reaches consensus on the provisions of a proposed rule, the Agency, consistent with its legal obligations, uses such consensus as the basis for its proposed rule, to be published in the Federal Register. This provides the required public notice and allows for a public comment period. Other participants and other interested parties retain their rights to comment, participate in an informal hearing (if requested) and judicial review. OSHA anticipates, however, that the pre-proposal consensus agreed upon by this Committee will effectively narrow the issues in the subsequent rulemaking to only those which truly remain in controversy.

B. Agency Commitment

In initiating this negotiated rulemaking process, OSHA is making a commitment on behalf of the Department of Labor that the agency and all other participants within the Department will provide adequate resources to ensure timely and successful completion of the process. This commitment includes making the process a priority activity for all representatives, components, officials, and personnel of the Department who need to be involved in the rulemaking, from the time of initiation until such time as a final rule is issued or the process expressly terminated. Once the process has been initiated, all representatives, components, officials, and personnel of the Department shall be expected to act in accordance with this commitment.

As provider of administrative support, OSHA will take steps to ensure that the negotiated rulemaking committee has the dedicated resources it requires to complete its work in a timely fashion. These include the provision or procurement of such support services as: properly equipped space adequate for public meetings and caucuses; logistical support as necessary; word processing, information dissemination, storage and other information handling services required by the committee; the services of a facilitator; and such additional statistical, economic, health, safety, legal, computing or other technical assistance as may be necessary.

OSHA, to the maximum extent possible consistent with the legal obligations of the agency, will use the consensus of the Committee as the basis for the rule proposed by the Agency for public notice and comment. The Agency believes that by clarifying and updating the existing standards, it can limit or reduce the number of deaths and injuries to employees engaged in structural erection who are exposed to a significant risk of injury and death because of the outdatedness and lack of clarity of certain current provisions in subpart R. The Agency, therefore, is committed to publishing a consensus proposal that is consistent with OSHA's legal mandates.

C. Negotiating Consensus

As discussed above, the negotiated rulemaking process is fundamentally different from the usual development process for OSHA proposed rules. Negotiation allows all the parties to discuss possible approaches to various issues rather than only asking them to respond to details of an OSHA draft proposal. The negotiation process involves a mutual education of the parties by each other on the practical concerns about the impact of various approaches. Each committee member participates in resolving the interests and concerns of other members, rather than leaving it up to OSHA to bridge different points of view.

A key principle of negotiated rulemaking is that agreement is by consensus of all the interests. Thus, no one interest or group of interests is able to control or dominate the process. The NRA defines consensus as the unanimous concurrence among interests represented on a negotiated rulemaking committee, unless the committee itself unanimously agrees to use a different definition. In addition, using a trained mediator to facilitate this process will assist all potential parties, including OSHA, to identify their real interests in the rule and so be able to reevaluate previously stated positions on issues involved in this rulemaking effort.

Appendix II. - Proposed Negotiation Procedures

A. Committee Formation

This negotiated rulemaking Committee will be formed and operated in full compliance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) in a manner consistent with the requirements of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990 (NRA).

B. Interests Involved

The Agency intends to conduct negotiated rulemaking proceedings with particular attention to ensuring full and adequate representation of those interests that may be significantly affected by the proposed rule. Section 562 of the NRA defines the term "interest" as follows:

(5) "interest" means, with respect to an issue or matter, multiple parties which have a similar point of view or which are likely to be affected in a similar manner. Particular attention has been given by the Department to ensure that any unique interests which have been identified in this regard, and which it is determined will be significantly affected by the proposed rule, are fully represented on the Committee.

C. Members

The negotiating group should not exceed 25 members, and fewer are preferable. OSHA is aware that there are many more potential participants, than there are membership slots on the Committee. The Agency does not believe, nor does the NRA contemplate, that each potentially affected group must participate directly in the negotiations; nevertheless, each affected interest should be adequately represented. In order to have a successful negotiation, it is important for interested parties to identify and form coalitions that adequately represent significantly affected interests. These coalitions, in order to provide adequate representation, must agree to support, both financially and technically, a member to the Committee whom they will choose to represent their "interest."

It is very important to recognize that interested parties who are not selected to membership on the Committee can make valuable contributions to this negotiated rulemaking effort in any of several ways:

* The person could request to be placed on the Committee mailing list, making written comment, as appropriate;

* The person could attend the Committee meetings, which are open to the public, caucus with his or her interest's member on the Committee, or even address the Committee (usually allowed at the end of an issue's discussion or the end of the session, as time permits); and/or * The person could assist in the work of a workgroup which might be established by the Committee.

Informal workgroups are usually established by an advisory committee to assist the Committee in "staffing" various technical matters e.g., researching or preparing summaries of the technical literature or comments on particular matters such as economic issues before the Committee so as to facilitate Committee deliberations. They might also assist in estimating costs and drafting regulatory text on issues associated with the analysis of the affordability and benefits addressed, and formulating drafts of the various provisions and their justifications previously developed by the committee. Given their staffing function, workgroups usually consist of participants who have expertise or particular interest in the technical matter(s) being studied. Because it recognizes the importance of this staffing work for the Committee, OSHA will provide appropriate technical expertise for such workgroups.

D. Good Faith Negotiation

Committee members must be willing to negotiate in good faith and have the authority to do so. The first step is to ensure that each member has good communications with his or her constituencies. An intra-interest network of communication should be established to bring information from the support organization to the member at the table, and to take information from the table back to the support organization. Second, each organization or coalition should, therefore, designate as its representative an official with credibility and authority to ensure that needed information is provided and decisions are made in a timely fashion. Negotiated rulemaking efforts can require a very significant contribution of time by the appointed members that must be sustained for up to a year. Other qualities that can be very helpful are negotiating experience and skills, and sufficient technical knowledge to participate in substantive negotiations.

Certain considerations are central to negotiating in good faith. One is the willingness to bring all issues to the table in an attempt to reach a consensus, instead of keeping key issues in reserve. The second is a willingness to keep the issues at the table and not take them to other forums. Finally, good faith includes a willingness to move away from the type of positions usually taken in a more traditional rulemaking process, and instead explore openly with other parties all ideas that may emerge from the discussions of the committee.

E. Facilitator

This individual or organization will not be involved with the substantive development of the standard. Rather, the facilitator's role generally includes:

(1) Chairing the meetings of the committee in an impartial manner;

(2) Impartially assisting the members of the committee in conducting discussions and negotiations;

(3) Performing the duties of the Designated Federal Official under the FACA; and

(4) Acting as disclosure officer for committee records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

F. OSHA Representative

The OSHA representative will be a full and active participant in the consensus building negotiations. The representative will meet regularly with various senior OSHA officials, briefing them on the negotiations and receiving their suggestions and advice, in order to effectively represent their views regarding the issues before the Committee. OSHA's representative will also ensure that the entire spectrum of governmental interests affected by revisions of subpart R, including the Office of Management and Budget and other Departmental offices, are kept informed of the negotiations and encouraged to make their concerns known in a timely fashion. OSHA's representative will also communicate with the ACCSH on a regular basis, informing it of the status and content of the negotiations.

In addition, the OSHA representative will present the negotiators with the accumulated record evidence gathered on an issue-by-issue basis for their consideration. (The Committee may also consult OSHA's representative with regard to the Agency's regulatory needs, appropriate boundaries of consideration, or technical information. Such information could include the areas of technological feasibility and economic concerns, including direct and indirect costs of compliance.) The OSHA representative, together with the Facilitator, will also be responsible for coordinating the administrative and committee support functions to be performed by OSHA's support team.

G. Committee Notice

OSHA is issuing this notice to announce the establishment of the Committee and its membership. The negotiation process will begin once the Committee membership roster is published in the Federal Register.

H. Tentative Schedule

The first meeting will focus largely on procedural matters, including the proposed Ground Rules. These will also include agreement on dates, times, and locations of future meetings, and identification and determination of how best to address principal issues for resolution.

To prevent delays that might postpone timely issuance of the proposal, after consulting the committee, OSHA intends to terminate the Committee's activities if it does not reach consensus on a proposed rule within 12 months of the first meeting. The process may end earlier if the Facilitator or the committee itself so recommends.

I. Record of Meetings

In accordance with FACA's requirements, the Facilitator will keep minutes and a record of all committee meetings. This record will be placed in the public docket No. S-775 for this rulemaking. Committee meetings will be announced in the Federal Register and will generally be open to the public.

J. Agency Action

As noted above, the Agency intends to use the Committee's consensus as the basis for the NPRM. OSHA expects to issue the proposed rule developed by the Committee, unless the consensus is inconsistent with OSHA's statutory authority or is not appropriately justified. In that event, the Agency will explain the reason for its decision.

K. Committee Procedures

Under the general guidance and direction of the Facilitator and subject to any applicable legal requirements, appropriate detailed procedures for committee meetings will be established. Committee members will be presented with proposed Ground Rules and agendas prior to the first meeting.

Appendix III - Some Key Issues for Negotiation

OSHA expects the key issues to be addressed as part of these negotiations will include:

1. Scope and application: Should subpart R cover construction specifications and work practices just for single and multi-story buildings or should it apply to all steel structures such as bridges, tanks and towers? 2. Construction specifications and work practices: Which construction specifications and/or work practices provide adequate protection for employee safety for steel erection? Would it be appropriate to limit the use of one-bolt connections? What rule is necessary regarding column stability? Should tandem ("christmas tree") loading and hoisting of structural members on the same (crane) hook be restricted? If so, how? What requirements should be set for double connections? 3. Written construction safety erection plan: Should OSHA require a written safety erection plan including construction specifications and safety provisions before the actual erection of the structures may start? What should be the required component parts of such a plan? 4. Fall protection: (a) To what extent are the fall protection requirements of proposed subpart M appropriate for steel erection work? Are there circumstances under which employees, who perform initial connections of structural components or other erection work, should be exempted from those requirements? What are those circumstances? To what extent would provisions for training and special designations adequately protect connectors or other erection workers from fall hazards? (b) What costs are associated with providing fall protection to employees? To what extent do employers who provide fall protection reduce their costs, such as through lower insurance and workers compensation premiums? How would productivity, for example, measured in terms of the time required to erect a completed structure, differ according to the fall protection strategy chosen? Have injuries and fatalities been reduced through the implementation of fall protection technologies or procedures?

[FR Doc. 94-12089 Filed 5-17-94; 8:45 am]

---