[Federal Register: January 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 6)][Notices]
[Page 923-927]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09ja09-61]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0053]
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories; Satellite
Notification and Acceptance Program
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Implementation of the Satellite Notification and Acceptance
Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces OSHA's implementation of the ninth
supplemental program under its Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
(NRTL) Program. This supplemental program is the Satellite Notification
and Acceptance Program (SNAP), and participation by NRTLs in the SNAP
is voluntary. The SNAP Description for this program specifies the
conditions under which NRTLs may use SNAP sites to perform equipment
testing and certification functions.
DATES: The SNAP will become effective on May 11, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MaryAnn Garrahan, Director, Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, NRTL Program,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210,
or phone (202) 693-2110.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On April 21, 2008, OSHA published in the Federal Register a notice
proposing the SNAP, and requested public comment on the proposal (73 FR
21378). OSHA made the proposed SNAP Description available on its Web
site at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html, but did not
provide this document in the published proposal. OSHA received seven
comments to the proposal, and has made a number of revisions to the
proposed SNAP based on these comments.
The SNAP will become the ninth supplemental program available to
NRTLs under the NRTL Program. In general, supplemental programs permit
an NRTL to use the services of other facilities to test and certify
products used in the workplace. OSHA formally established the initial
eight supplemental programs after publishing a description of these
programs in the Federal Register (60 FR 12980, March 9, 1995). The
current notice sets forth the criteria and conditions that an NRTL must
meet to use the SNAP.
To use a supplemental program, an NRTL must receive approval from
OSHA and, once approved, the supplemental program becomes a part of the
NRTL's scope of recognition. In general, each NRTL is approved by OSHA
for a scope of recognition that identifies the following three
elements: (1) The types of products the NRTL may approve, (2) the
NRTL's "recognized sites," that are the NRTL's wholly owned sites
that can perform the full range of product-testing and -certification
activities necessary in approving those products, and (3)
"supplemental programs," that, unlike the other two elements, are
optional. Through these programs, an NRTL can use other resources in
performing activities necessary for product testing and certification.
OSHA maintains a Web page for each NRTL describing its scope of
recognition.
For more information about supplemental programs and the NRTL
Program in general, see the 1995 Federal Register notice cited above,
and Chapters 1 and 2 of the NRTL Program Directive (hereafter, "the
NRTL Directive"; CPL 01-00-003--CPL 1-0.3 ("NRTL Program Policies,
Procedures, and Guidelines")), which is available on OSHA's Web site
at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html. This site also
provides a listing of the types of products that OSHA requires to be
approved by NRTLs and the regulations of the NRTL Program (29 CFR
1910.7)
II. Summary and Analysis of Comments
OSHA provided 30 days for the public to submit comments on the
proposed SNAP, with the comment period ending on May 21, 2008 (73 FR
21378, April 21, 2008). We received seven comments--six from currently
recognized NRTLs, and one from an independent consultant who is a
former staff member of OSHA's NRTL Program. In the remainder of this
section, we discuss the comments made on the key conditions described
for the proposed SNAP.
A. Limiting use of an NRTL's mark to wholly owned SNAP sites. In
the notice proposing the SNAP, OSHA stated that it "would allow SNAP
sites that are wholly owned by the NRTL to authorize the use of the
NRTL's mark." (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0001, p. 21380.) OSHA proposed this
condition because it believes that NRTLs must retain control of this
final step of their product-approval process. This step identifies them
as the entity that tested and approved a product for use in the
workplace. However, several commenters opposed this condition. For
example, the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) stated that this
condition was "overly restrictive and could prevent expansion of SNAP
internationally." (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0007.) Underwriters Laboratories
(UL) noted that this condition could weaken the approval process
because a majority-owned SNAP site would lack "authority to grant or
withdraw use of the NRTL['s] mark." In addition, UL noted that the
"[a]uthorization to use the mark is an administrative, not technical,
task that follows the critical technical review and decision on
certification." Thus, if maintained as a final and administrative
step, allowing a majority-owned site to grant the mark would not
compromise the testing and certification process. UL also commented
that this condition would make auditing the entire process impractical
because "OSHA must audit 2 separate sites to review the complete
certification process." (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0006.) These comments made
clear that OSHA does not have to limit the authorization function to
SNAP sites owned solely by an NRTL, especially when the decision on
certification can occur at a majority-owned site. Thus, OSHA removed
this condition from the SNAP.
B. Definition of SNAP sites. OSHA proposed that NRTLs, or
organizations in which NRTLs have a majority interest, own or lease
SNAP sites. Several NRTLs stated that this condition eliminated the
option of using sites owned or leased by their parent company. (See
Exs. OSHA-2007-0053-0002 and -0003.) Intertek Testing Services NA
(ITSNA) also noted that current NRTL Program policy (paragraph X,
Appendix C, NRTL Directive) allows NRTLs to either wholly own or
"organizationally encompass" their recognized sites. Thus, the policy
does not require the NRTL to demonstrate ownership of sites that are
organizationally encompassed. (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0003.) This comment
indicated that OSHA should allow NRTLs to similarly encompass their
SNAP sites or allow SNAP sites that are not majority-owned by the NRTL.
NSF International (NSF) pointed out that the majority-ownership
condition makes it impossible to have SNAP sites in foreign countries
that do not permit majority ownership by outside entities. (OSHA-2007-
0053-0009.)
OSHA proposed the majority-ownership condition to ensure that NRTLs
would have administrative and operational control over the SNAP site.
OSHA believes that this condition would maintain the same degree of
control that NRTLs must now exercise over their recognized sites. This
policy specifies that the NRTL must wholly own or "organizationally
encompass" its recognized sites, and "have administrative and
operational control over these sites." (As explained below, the term
"organizationally encompass," when used in this context, is
equivalent to the NRTL completely owning the site's legal entity.) The
policy also states that "the NRTL must clearly demonstrate control in
its operating policies and procedures and quality assurance program
documentation."
OSHA requires this policy largely to ensure that a site that it
recognizes as part of the NRTL (i.e., a recognized site) constitutes
the NRTL's technical capabilities, which is necessary to determine that
the NRTL meets the capability requirements under 29 CFR 1910.7.
However, as explained in the notice proposing the SNAP, a SNAP site's
technical capabilities are not considered in making this
determination. Thus, majority-ownership ensures that NRTLs maintain
administrative and operational control over their SNAP sites, thereby
providing NRTLs the flexibility under SNAP to conduct their
certification activities at more locations than had been previously
possible.
As used in OSHA's policy on Sites, the term "organizationally
encompass" means that a site is within the NRTL's organizational
structure and subject to the NRTL's control. This term covers
situations in which a state or region of a country issues a license to
the NRTL that identifies its legal name, and allows it to establish an
office or facility in this state or region to conduct business without
requiring the NRTL to establish the office or facility as a subsidiary
with a headquarters located outside the country. Because the site's
legal entity is the NRTL, the entity is in effect wholly owned by the
NRTL. Thus, the NRTL's control over a SNAP site would not diminish if
OSHA permits an NRTL to establish a SNAP site that is organizationally
encompassed by the NRTL. Therefore, the definition of a SNAP site in
the final SNAP Description will provide for this option.
With respect to the comments suggesting that OSHA allow SNAP sites
that are owned by the NRTL's parent company, ITSNA stated that it has
"significant experience" that demonstrates ownership by "a common
parent" of both the site and the NRTL "can provide the same level of
control" as direct ownership of this site by the NRTL. (Ex. OSHA-2007-
0053-0003, p. 2.) In reviewing this condition, OSHA agrees that the
requisite control would exist provided that the NRTL's parent company
wholly owns or organizationally encompasses the site, and delegates or
otherwise assigns responsibility for the site's SNAP functions to the
NRTL. This control must be demonstrated in the parent's and the NRTL's
policies or procedures, as appropriate. Under these circumstances, OSHA
would be assured that NRTLs exercise the same degree of control that
OSHA now requires by NRTLs over their recognized sites. Accordingly,
OSHA concludes that the NRTL has control of a SNAP site wholly owned or
organizationally encompassed by the NRTL's parent company when the
parent company delegates to the NRTL operational and administrative
control over the SNAP site or the functions performed on behalf of the
NRTL at the site.
C. Frequency of SNAP-site audits. OSHA specified in the proposal
that NRTLs must perform an initial audit to qualify a site for the
SNAP, and then perform two program audits and one technical audit at
the site each year. OSHA proposed these conditions to ensure that NRTLs
timely identified nonconforming situations at SNAP sites. OSHA plans to
audit each SNAP site every two years and, therefore, is relying on
adequate oversight by NRTLs to compensate for the reduced frequency of
OSHA audits. This proposed condition seemed to be a reasonable
safeguard for assuring the NRTLs could resolve problems before serious
consequences arose. Several commenters opposed this condition as
excessive, and unnecessary for proper oversight. (See Exs. OSHA-2007-
0053-0003, -0004, -0009.) In reviewing this condition, OSHA concludes
that the distinction drawn between program and technical audits is
somewhat artificial, and that some of those audits may overlap. Thus,
OSHA believes that it would be adequate for NRTLs to perform a minimum
of two audits of each SNAP site on a yearly (12-month) cycle, provided
that each audit reviews all of the site's SNAP operations, both
technical (e.g., staff competence, equipment, facilities) and
programmatic (e.g., quality-control procedures, internal audits,
control of the certification mark). However, if the site only performs
SNAP product testing and no "SNAP function" (both described later in
this notice), then the NRTL must perform a minimum of one audit of the
SNAP site, provided that the audit reviews all of a SNAP sites testing
activities. This frequency is consistent with the current practice
specified by OSHA for regular internal audits by NRTLs of their testing
processes.
D. Location of auditors. OSHA proposed that the program auditor for
SNAP sites be located at the SNAP headquarters of the NRTL, which would
need to be located at a recognized site. OSHA proposed this condition
because it believed that the headquarters would have experienced and
well qualified auditors available, and using a centralized pool of
auditors would maintain the continuity and reliability of audits. In
addition, locating the NRTL's auditors at a central location would
facilitate access to the NRTL auditors and their reports by OSHA
auditors, especially when OSHA auditors conduct annual audits at the
NRTL's SNAP headquarters. NSF believed that staff located at other
sites are as qualified to conduct audits as auditors from the SNAP
headquarters of the NRTL. (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0009.) Several commenters
raised concerns about the burden imposed on auditors having to travel
to many distant SNAP sites from an NRTL's headquarters. (Exs. OSHA-
2007-0053-0003 and -0009.) Based on this travel burden, ITSNA
recommended that auditors be located at the NRTLs' regional
headquarters.
After reviewing these comments, OSHA believes that locating
auditors at a recognized site, as well as at the NRTL's SNAP
headquarters, will not compromise the effectiveness of the audits.
Accordingly, OSHA finds that an NRTL can exercise adequate oversight
over its SNAP sites when the auditors of these sites report their
findings to the NRTL's SNAP headquarters, and when OSHA annually audits
any of these locations annually. OSHA also is assuring the
effectiveness of the audits by requiring that auditors be located at
any recognized site, and by requiring the auditors at these sites to
forward audit records to the SNAP headquarters of the NRTL and to keep
a copy of the audit report at the auditor's location.
E. Independence of NRTL's SNAP auditors. OSHA proposed that an
NRTL's SNAP auditors must be in an organizational unit that is separate
from the NRTL's operations, and that the unit must report directly to a
senior executive of the NRTL. OSHA proposed this condition to ensure
that SNAP auditors were independent of an NRTL's operational units, and
that auditing units had authority to compel operational units to
conform with the prescribed SNAP conditions. Two commenters opposed
this condition. (Exs. OSHA-2007-0053-0007 and -0008.). The first
commenter believed this condition was inappropriate because auditing
units may report to a team of executives instead of one executive,
while the second commenter noted that the executive structure
envisioned in the proposal may not exist in many NRTL organizations.
OSHA agrees with these comments, and revised the condition to specify
that SNAP auditors cannot be under the control or direction of any SNAP
site, and that auditors must report audit results from a SNAP site to
the SNAP headquarters of the NRTL.
F. Policies and procedures for SNAP operations. Footnote 4 in the
proposed SNAP Description states:
For purposes of participating in SNAP and complying with the
criteria in II.C and II.D of this description, any [NRTL may] use
policies and procedures applicable to other aspects of its
operations provided they meet or are tailored to meet the relevant
criteria. Under such conditions, the NRTL would not need to develop
separate policies and procedures for its participation in SNAP.
Thus, OSHA was trying to facilitate NRTLs' participation in the SNAP by
permitting the NRTLs to adopt already-developed policies and
procedures. In its comment, UL recommended revising this footnote to
allow NRTLs to use "alternate policies and procedures (e.g., those
applicable to other aspects of its operations) provided they meet or
are tailored to meet or exceed (in an alternate way) the relevant
criteria." (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0007; emphasis in original noting
revised language.) UL explained that the revisions would allow NRTLs to
use "individual level qualification" for SNAP sites instead of site-
level qualification. However, OSHA requires individual qualification
under the proposed SNAP as a condition for qualifying a site. For
example, paragraph II.C.2 of the proposed SNAP Description requires,
"Detailed criteria to grant a site's qualification, addressing both
its capability to evaluate a product with respect to the requirements
in a standard (i.e., technical capability) and its capability to
perform any of the proposed SNAP functions (i.e., program
capability)." Such qualification must ensure that a site has properly
qualified staff, equipment, and procedures to perform technical and
program functions. OSHA is revising the proposed SNAP Description to
clarify this point, while leaving the footnote in its proposed form.
G. Other topics and issues. CSA (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0007) noted
that the proposed SNAP Description did not provide sufficient detail
regarding the qualification and requalification requirements to ensure
consistent application of the requirements. In response to this
comment, OSHA will update the application format applicable for SNAP to
specify the minimum documentation needed to apply, and the criteria
OSHA will use to determine if the application is satisfactory.
ITSNA expressed concern that use of the term "leased" in the
definition of SNAP in the proposed SNAP Description could be
interpreted to exclude subleasing. (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0003.) To avoid
confusion, OSHA is clarifying the definition to include subleasing and
renting.
UL took exception to a statement in the preamble of the proposal
that appeared to require NRTLs to issue the authorization of its mark
"simultaneously or concurrently with the final decision on
certification." (Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0007.) In taking exception to this
statement, UL noted that "there is no realistic way to concurrently or
simultaneously decide and authorize." OSHA believes the preamble
statement is ambiguous, and agrees with UL that authorization must
follow the decision to certify a product, even if, as UL noted,
authorization occurs immediately after the decision.
UL also opposed the condition in the proposed SNAP Description
requiring NRTLs to post SNAP-site locations on the NRTLs' Web sites.
(Ex. OSHA-2007-0053-0007.) In this regard, UL stated that the public
will have difficulty understanding the differences between a SNAP site
and an NRTL site, and that "competitive issues between NRTLs using
SNAP may arise regarding how their SNAP sites are referenced on their
respective Internet sites." OSHA agrees that the public may not
readily understand the differences between NRTL sites and SNAP sites,
and that inconsistencies could arise among NRTLs in describing SNAP
sites on their Web sites. Therefore, OSHA will remove this condition
from the final SNAP Description, and will maintain on its Web site a
list of NRTLs and their associated SNAP sites, as well as an
explanation of how NRTLs and their recognized sites differ from SNAP
sites.
Finally, UL noted that the proposed SNAP Description allowed SNAP
sites to perform testing, which UL stated was not a SNAP function. (Ex.
OSHA-2007-0053-0007.) However, OSHA proposed the SNAP to allow NRTLs to
perform testing and certification functions at sites in countries that
do not permit foreign entities to wholly own local businesses, provided
the NRTL has qualified the sites as capable of performing specific
product testing. OSHA revised the proposed SNAP Description to make
clear that SNAP sites can perform testing when qualified by an NRTL to
do so.
III. Key Elements of SNAP
With this Federal Register notice, OSHA announces implementation of
the SNAP. Implementation of the SNAP will not change any of the
requirements for NRTLs found under 29 CFR 1910.7, or any of OSHA's
requirements governing product approval by NRTLs. OSHA will implement
the SNAP through the NRTL Directive as part of its NRTL Program policy.
The SNAP will allow NRTLs to use SNAP sites to perform functions
necessary for the NRTLs' testing and certification operations. To
receive approval to participate in the SNAP, NRTLs must ensure that the
SNAP sites meet the conditions specified in the SNAP Description. These
conditions consist of controls and safeguards for ensuring the efficacy
of the functions performed at SNAP sites. Accordingly, an NRTL must
qualify a prospective SNAP site to ensure that the site can perform one
or more functions or activities permitted under the SNAP Description.
Also, OSHA will audit each SNAP site, as well as the NRTL's recognized
site that centrally manages the NRTL's SNAP operations. If OSHA finds
that an NRTL or a SNAP site is not in compliance with any condition
specified in the SNAP Description, it may remove the NRTL or the SNAP
site from the SNAP.
After reviewing the entire record, including the comments described
above in section II of this notice ("Summary and Analysis of
Comments"), OSHA determined that SNAP sites will be able to perform
the following SNAP functions (paragraphs A to E) and product-testing
activity (paragraph F):
A. Qualify under Programs 2 through 7 and 9.\1\ Programs 2 through
7 address NRTLs' acceptance and use of testing data and product
evaluations from other facilities that are not part of their corporate
structure, specifically independent laboratories and product
manufacturers. Under these programs, NRTLs must qualify each location
(or site) that generates testing data or product evaluations. In
qualifying such a facility, an NRTL must ensure that the facility meets
the NRTL's internal criteria for conducting the tasks necessary to
collect testing data and perform product evaluations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The NRTL Directive contains information about each of these
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program 9 describes the procedures followed by NRTLs when using
other facilities to perform specified services such as equipment
calibration and follow-up inspections. NRTLs qualify each of these
facilities to ensure that the facilities meet the NRTL's internal
criteria for providing the specified services. Implementation of the
SNAP will permit SNAP sites to qualify to perform functions described
under Programs 2 through 7 and 9.
B. Accept data under Programs 2 through 8.\2\ In accepting testing
data or product evaluations under Programs 2 through 8, NRTLs must have
appropriate technical personnel to review the adequacy and accuracy of
the data and evaluations, as well as clear procedures for conducting
these reviews. The SNAP will expand this capability from recognized
sites to SNAP sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The NRTL Directive contains information about each of these
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Provide OSHA with access to original product-testing and -
evaluation records. AN NRTL must maintain, and make available to OSHA
on request, the original records resulting from its product testing and
evaluation functions. These critical documents allow NRTLs to exercise
quality control over product testing and evaluation functions, and permit
OSHA to perform an accurate audit of these NRTL functions. SNAP sites must
have the capability to maintain, and provide OSHA with access to,
records of functions performed on behalf of NRTLs.
D. Perform final technical reviews and make decisions on product
certification. Final technical reviews and subsequent decisions
regarding product certification are the last functions performed in the
technical process for product certification. To provide assurance that
a product meets the relevant test standard(s), only a well qualified
technical staff can perform these functions. As with recognized sites,
SNAP sites can perform these functions only if they have demonstrated
the capability of doing so.
E. Authorize use of an NRTL's mark. An NRTL's mark symbolizes the
final decision to certify a product, and clearly identifies the NRTL as
the source responsible for testing and certifying the product. While
the SNAP will permit a SNAP site to authorize the mark of the NRTL for
which it performs product-testing and -certification functions, the
NRTLs must control the use of their marks and ensure that SNAP sites
authorize this use only after the decision to certify a product.
F. SNAP product-testing activity. SNAP sites may perform product
testing within the scope of recognition of the NRTL, provided that the
NRTL qualifies the site as having the capability for this testing. This
activity may be the only activity performed by a SNAP site, or
supplement one or more SNAP functions.
IV. Submitting SNAP Applications
OSHA will begin accepting applications from NRTLs for the SNAP
after its effective date of May 11, 2009. At that time, OSHA will
invite NRTLs and NRTL applicants to apply for approval to participate
in SNAP and establish SNAP sites. Prior to submitting a SNAP
application, applicants should review the SNAP Description, which OSHA
will make available on its Web site for the NRTL Program at http://
www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html. This Web site will contain
instructions describing the information to submit in a SNAP application
and will provide an application format that may be used for this
purpose.
V. Authority and Signature
Thomas M. Stohler, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, directed the
preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this
notice pursuant to sections 6(b) and 8(g) of the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655 and 657), Secretary of Labor's
Order 5-2007 (72 FR 31160), and 29 CFR 1911.
Signed at Washington, DC, on January 5th, 2009.
Thomas M. Stohler,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-163 Filed 1-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
