[Federal Register: September 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 176)][Proposed Rules] [Page 46958-46964]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14se09-23]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Parts 1910, 1926
[Docket OSHA-S215-2006-0063]
RIN 1218-AB67
Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution;
Electrical Protective Equipment; Limited Reopening of Record; Notice of
Informal Public Hearing
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; limited reopening of the rulemaking record and
notice of public hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 15, 2005, OSHA published a proposed rule to revise the
general industry and construction standards for electric power
generation, transmission, and distribution work and for electrical
protective equipment. The proposed general industry and construction
standards for electric power generation, transmission, and distribution
work included revised minimum approach distance tables. Those tables
limit how close an employee (or a conductive object he or she is
contacting) may get to an energized circuit part. In light of recent
changes to one of the consensus standards on which OSHA relied in
formulating the proposed minimum approach distances, OSHA is reopening
the record on this proposal to obtain additional comments related to
the proposed minimum approach distances. The record will remain open on
this limited basis until October 15, 2009. OSHA is also announcing a
public hearing on the issues raised in this notice.
DATES: Comments: Comments must be submitted (transmitted, postmarked,
or delivered) no later than October 15, 2009.
Notices of intention to appear: Interested persons who intend to
present testimony or question witnesses at the public hearing must
submit (transmit, postmark, or deliver) notices of intention to appear no
later than October 1, 2009.
Hearing testimony and evidence: Interested persons who request more
than 10 minutes to present testimony or who intend to submit
documentary evidence at the hearing must submit (transmit, postmark, or
deliver) the full text of their testimony and all documentary evidence
no later than October 15, 2009.
Public hearing: The informal public hearing will be held from 9:30
a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on October 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Public hearing: The informal public hearing will be held in
Room N3437A, B, and C at the U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Comments, notices of intention to appear, hearing testimony, and
documentary evidence: You may submit comments, notices of intention to
appear, hearing testimony, and documentary evidence, identified by
Docket No. OSHA-S215-2006-0063, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: If your comments, including attachments, do not
exceed 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202)
693-1648.
Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier
service: You must submit two copies of your comments and attachments to
the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-S215-2006-0063, U.S. Department
of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210; telephone (202) 693-2350 (OSHA's TTY number is (877) 889-5627).
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal
business hours, 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., ET.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
docket number (Docket No. OSHA-S215-2006-0063) or regulation identifier
number (RIN 1218-AB67) for this rulemaking. All comments received will
be posted without change to http://dockets.osha.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Docket: To read or download comments and materials submitted in
response to this Federal Register notice, go to Docket OSHA-S215-2006-
0063 at http://www.regulations.gov or at the OSHA Docket Office at the
previously listed address. All comments and submissions are listed in
the http://www.regulations.gov index. However, some information (for
example, copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or
download through that Web page. All comments and submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the
OSHA Docket Office.
Electronic copies of this Federal Register document are available
at http://www.regulations.gov. This document, as well as news releases
and other relevant information, also are available at OSHA's Web page
at http://www.osha.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Press inquiries and general
information: Ms. Jennifer Ashley, Office of Communications, Room N-
3647, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-1999.
Technical information: David Wallis, OSHA, Office of Engineering
Safety, Room N-3609, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-2277.
Hearings: Ms. Veneta Chatmon, OSHA, Office of Communications, Room
N-3647; 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202) 693-1999; e-mail chatmon.veneta@dol.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 15, 2005, OSHA issued a proposed
rule to revise the general industry and construction standards for
electric power generation, transmission, and distribution work and for
electrical protective equipment (70 FR 34822). The Agency solicited
public comments, and held a public hearing on March 6 through 14, 2006.
Administrative Law Judge William Colwell set a deadline of July 14,
2006, for filing written comments, summations, position statements, and
briefs.
The proposed requirements for electric power generation,
transmission, and distribution work for general industry and
construction would be contained in 29 CFR 1910.269 and 29 CFR part
1926, subpart V (Sec. Sec. 1926.950 through 1926.968), respectively.
Proposed Sec. 1926.960(c)(1) would require employees to maintain
minimum approach distances from exposed energized parts. The minimum
approach distances are specified in proposed Tables V-2 through V-6.
Existing Sec. 1910.269(l)(2) and proposed Tables R-6 through R-10
contain equivalent requirements for general industry. OSHA developed
the minimum approach distance tables in the proposal using principles
adopted from the 1993 National Electrical Safety Code (NESC, ANSI \1\
C2-1993) \2\ and ANSI/IEEE \3\ Standard 516-1987. (See 70 FR 34822, at
34861 (June 15, 2005) and 73 FR 62942 (Oct. 22, 2008) for a detailed
description of the methods OSHA used to calculate the proposed minimum
approach distances.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ANSI is the American National Standards Institute.
\2\ In promulgating the general industry standard at Sec.
1910.269 in 1994, OSHA used minimum approach distances that matched
the corresponding values in the 1993 NESC. The NESC subcommittee
subsequently revised their distances in a tentative interim
amendment correcting the tables in the 1993 NESC. The minimum
approach distances in the pending proposal for both subpart V and
Sec. 1910.269 are identical to the minimum approach distances that
appeared in the NESC through the 2002 edition. For the 2007 edition,
the NESC adopted minimum approach distances that were the same for
voltages of 72.5 kV and lower, but that were larger for voltages of
72.6 kV and higher. The increase in minimum approach distances for
voltages of 72.6 kV and higher was due to the use of minimum tool
insulation distance rather than minimum air insulation distance as
described later in this notice.
\3\ IEEE is the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 22, 2008, OSHA published a Federal Register notice to
reopen the record on a limited basis for a period of 30 days, or until
November 21, 2008, because the IEEE technical committee responsible for
revising IEEE Standard 516 identified what in its view was an error in
the calculations of phase-to-phase minimum approach distances for
nominal voltages 230 kV and higher (73 FR 62942). The equation used to
calculate the electrical component of the minimum approach distance for
voltages over 72.5 kV included a term, a, that represented the
saturation factor for the transient overvoltage involved. This factor,
which was taken from a graph,\4\ increased substantially with
increasing voltage. The minimum approach distances for phase-to-phase
exposures were calculated using an a factor corresponding to the phase-
to-ground transient overvoltage rather than for the higher phase-to-
phase transient overvoltage. Because the minimum approach distances in
OSHA's 2005 proposal were based on the same equations called into
question by the IEEE technical committee, the same issue potentially
affected the minimum approach distances in OSHA's proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The graph, which was published in IEEE Committee Report,
"Recommendations for safety in live-line maintenance" (IEEE T&D,
vol. PAS-87, no. 2, pp. 346-352, Feb. 1968), was taken from test
data. However, the underlying test data were lost. Consequently, the
a factor had to be read from the published graph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the time the Agency published the reopening notice in October
2008, the IEEE committee was voting on a draft revised IEEE standard
that would have corrected the perceived error by (1) using a formula to
calculate the a factor to avoid errors that could be made in reading values
from the graph; and (2) extrapolating values for the a factor beyond the range
of the underlying test data. In its reopening notice, OSHA asked for
comments on IEEE's proposed approach for resolving this issue and
raised several questions related to whether the final rule should
reflect any elements of the draft IEEE standard.\5\ The reopening
notice limited comments to issues related to minimum approach distances
for voltages of 72.6 kV and higher (73 FR 62942).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ OSHA is repeating, in this notice, several of these
questions in slightly different form now that IEEE has formally
published a new version of Standard 516.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA received only eight responses to the 2008 reopening notice.
Most commenters generally supported the idea of incorporating into the
final rule IEEE's proposed approach for calculating phase-to-phase
minimum approach distances for voltages of 72.6 kV and higher. Two
commenters, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and
Edison Electric Institute (EEI), recommended that OSHA open the record
again when the IEEE committee adopted a final standard (see Document
IDs: \6\ OSHA-S215-2006-0063-0526, OSHA-S215-2006-0063-0527). EEI also
requested an extension of the comment period, an expansion of the scope
of the reopening to cover minimum approach distances for voltages below
72.6 kV, and a public hearing (see Document ID: OSHA-S215-2006-0063-
0530). This notice resolves all of EEI's pending requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These are the Document IDs on the Federal eRulemaking
Portal, http://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Minimum Approach Distances for Phase-to-Phase Exposures for Voltages
of 72.6 kV and Higher
The IEEE committee recently adopted and published a new edition of
IEEE Standard 516.\7\ The revised standard adopts a new methodology,
using a different set of formulas, for calculating phase-to-phase
minimum approach distances for voltages of 72.6 kV and higher.\8\ These
formulas are derived from testing for line configurations (that is, for
system design) rather than for live-line work. In other words, the
underlying formulas are intended to be used for determining appropriate
conductor spacing rather than for determining minimum approach
distances appropriate for employees performing live-line work. To
account for the presence of the employee working in an aerial lift
bucket within the air gap between the two phase conductors, the
committee incorporated the concept of a floating electrode in the air
gap. The committee's approach to determining the electrical component
of the minimum approach distance can be summarized as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This document, IEEE Standard 516-2009, is available for
inspection and copying in the Docket Office at the address listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
\8\ The approach for extrapolating values for the a factor that
the IEEE committee was considering at the time of the 2008 reopening
notice, which assumed that the value continued to increase in a
linear fashion, failed to achieve consensus (73 FR 62942).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Start with a formula to calculate the critical sparkover voltage
\9\ for the distance between two conductors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The critical sparkover voltage, or V50, is the
voltage that will sparkover a specified distance 50 percent of the
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Modify the formula to account for a 3.3-meter floating electrode
to represent an employee working within an aerial lift bucket between
the phase conductors.
3. Modify the formula to convert the critical sparkover voltage to
a withstand voltage.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The withstand voltage is the voltage at which sparkover is
not likely to occur across a specified distance. It is the voltage
taken at the 3[sigma] point below the sparkover voltage, assuming
that the sparkover curve follows a normal distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Determine the maximum transient overvoltage on the line and
substitute that value for the withstand voltage.
5. Rearrange the equation to solve for distance.
In more technical detail, this approach is as follows:
1. The equation for calculating the critical sparkover voltage for
a given distance between two conductors includes a gap factor, k. This
factor depends on several variables:
alpha = the proportion of the negative switching impulse voltage to
the total phase-to-phase impulse voltage.
Ddesign L L = the design phase-to-phase clearance
H = the average height of the phase above the ground
Table 1 shows the values recommended by IEEE Standard 516-2009 for
these variables and the resultant gap factors.
Table 1--Recommended Gap Factors (k)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ddesign L L/
Phase-to-phase voltage Alpha H k
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<= 242 kV........................ 0.33 0.8 1.451
> 242 kV......................... 0.41 0.8 1.530
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IEEE Standard 516-2009 uses the following equation to calculate the
critical sparkover voltage for the designed gap between two phase
conductors:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.000
Where:
V50 = the critical sparkover voltage in kilovolts
k = the gap factor from Table 1
Dl-l = the sparkover distance in meters
2. When live-line bare-hand work\11\ is performed, the employee is
typically positioned between two or more phase conductors. The employee
could be working, for example, from an aerial lift platform or a
conductor cart. These devices and the worker are both conductive. The
presence of a conductive object in the air gap reduces its dielectric
strength. IEEE Standard 516-2009 introduces a constant, KF, to account
for the presence of the employee and other conductive objects in the
air gap. IEEE Standard 516-2009 uses KF equal to 0.9 to accommodate a
3.3-meter conductive object in the air gap. This value is equivalent to
a 10 percent reduction in the dielectric strength of the gap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ This is work performed with the employee at the same
potential as one of the phase conductors. The employee is insulated,
by air or another insulating medium, from the other phase conductors
and from ground.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With this factor included, the equation for the critical sparkover
voltage is:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.001
3. IEEE sets the withstand voltage at a level that is 3[sigma]
lower than the critical sparkover voltage, as indicated in the following equation:
VW = (1--3[sigma])V50
Where:
VW = the withstand voltage
V50 = the critical sparkover voltage
[sigma] = 5 percent for a normal distribution
4. To solve for the electrical component of the clearance, the
maximum transient overvoltage is substituted for the withstand voltage.
The IEEE committee used the following equation to calculate the maximum
transient overvoltage on the line:
TL L = 1.35TL G + 0.45
Where:
TL L = the phase-to-phase maximum transient overvoltage in per unit
TL G = the phase-to-ground maximum transient overvoltage in per unit
5. Substituting the values of the various constants and solving
these equations for distance, IEEE Standard 516-2009 uses the following
equations to calculate the minimum air insulation distance:
For voltages less than or equal to 242 kV:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.002
For voltages more than 242 kV:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.003
Where:
DL L = the minimum air insulation distance (the minimum distance
needed to prevent sparkover with air alone as the insulating medium)
TL G = the phase-to-ground maximum transient overvoltage in per unit
VL L = the rms phase-to-phase system voltage
Tools in the air gap. The presence of an insulated tool in the air
gap reduces the air gap's dielectric strength. IEEE Standard 516-2009
generally gives two values for the electrical component of the minimum
approach distance: One in air (called MAID \12\) and one with a tool in
the air gap (called MTID \13\).\14\ Unlike the most recent edition of
the NESC,\15\ which uses the tool distance plus an ergonomic component
(0.31 or 0.61 meters) in setting minimum approach distances, IEEE
Standard 516-2009 does not provide either the tool distance or a means
of calculating it for phase-to-phase exposures. Section 4.5.2.3
justifies this as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ MAID is the minimum air insulation distance.
\13\ MTID is the minimum tool insulation distance.
\14\ IEEE Standard 516-2009 increases the electrical component
of the minimum approach distance by 10 percent (6 percent for the
tool and 4 percent for intangibles) before the saturation factor is
applied.
\15\ This document, NESC, ANSI C2-2007, is available for
inspection and copying in the Docket Office at the address listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
The definition of MTID applies only to line-to-ground
application. It is rare that a worker would be at the potential of
one phase while working on another phase. If a nonconductive object,
such as an insulated tool, is placed in the air gap joining two
phases, an engineering study should be performed. [Additional]
testing is required to develop a line-to-line MTID. If a line-to-
line MTID is required, the same factor as used in the line-to-ground
distance may be used. Industry practices normally use an MTID that
is the same as or greater than the MAID.
B. Minimum Approach Distances for Voltages Up to 72.5 kV
IEEE Standard 516-2009 contains a slightly revised methodology for
calculating minimum approach distances for voltages up to 72.5 kV. In
the past, IEEE Standard 516 calculated these distances using sparkover
distances in IEEE Standard 4-1995, which are based on 60-Hz rod-to-rod
sparkover voltages. The IEEE committee identified, in its view, two
problems with continuing to use these distances without further
adjustment. First, the distances are based on testing with 60-Hz
voltages, not transient impulses. The sparkover voltage for a given
distance is higher for a transient overvoltage than for an equal 60-Hz
voltage. Second, the voltages in IEEE Standard 4-1995 are sparkover
voltages, not withstand voltages. The withstand voltage for a given
distance is smaller than the corresponding sparkover voltage. Thus, the
two problems identified by the IEEE committee work in opposite
directions. The first one would decrease the minimum approach distance;
the second would increase it. IEEE Standard 516-2009 resolves both
problems with resultant minimum approach distances that are slightly
smaller than those in earlier editions. To overcome the first problem,
IEEE Standard 516-2009 applies an impulse test factor of 1.3 to convert
60-Hz sparkover voltage to the critical sparkover voltage for a
transient overvoltage. The standard then uses a 3[sigma] margin (0.85)
to convert the critical sparkover voltage to a withstand voltage. This
addresses the second problem.
Table 2 shows a comparison of the 60-Hz sparkover voltage with the
transient overvoltage withstand voltage for different rod-to-rod air
gaps. This table shows that a given air gap can withstand a somewhat
higher transient overvoltage than it can a 60-Hz voltage. The
relationship between the electrical component of the minimum approach
distance and the maximum transient overvoltage in this range is linear
and, in IEEE Standard 516-2009, is represented by the following linear
formula for phase-to-ground exposures:\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ IEEE Standard 516 uses this equation for voltages more than
27.00 kV but less than or equal to 72.5 kV. For voltages less than
27.00 kV, IEEE Standard 516 uses a distance of 0.02 meters, with the
following explanation: "When the TOVPeak is less than
27.00 kV, sufficient test data are not available to calculate the
MAID, which is less than 2 cm or 0.06 ft."
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.004
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where:
DM = Distance in meters
TOV = Maximum phase-to-ground transient overvoltage (peak)
The corresponding formula for phase-to-phase exposures is:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14SE09.005
Where:
DM = Distance in meters
TOV = Maximum phase-to-phase transient overvoltage (peak)
Table 2--Comparison of 60-Hz Sparkover With Transient Overvoltage
Withstand
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gap
60-Hz rod- spacing
Impulse transient overvoltage rod-to-rod to-rod from IEEE
withstand (kV peak)* sparkover Std 4-1995
(kV peak) (cm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27.6.......................................... 25 2
39.8.......................................... 36 3
50.8.......................................... 46 4
58.6.......................................... 53 5
66.3.......................................... 60 6
77.4.......................................... 70 8
87.3.......................................... 79 10
95............................................ 86 12
105........................................... 95 14
115........................................... 104 16
123.8......................................... 112 18
132.6......................................... 120 20
158........................................... 143 25
184.5......................................... 167 30
212.2......................................... 192 35
240.9......................................... 218 40
268.5......................................... 243 45
298.4......................................... 270 50
355.8......................................... 322 60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The voltage in this column equals the voltage in the second column x
1.3 x 0.85.
C. Comparison of the Revised IEEE Minimum Approach Distances With
OSHA's Proposed Minimum Approach Distances
Table 3 compares OSHA's proposed minimum approach distances with
distances resulting from the application of the changes described
earlier in IEEE Standard 516-2009.
Table 3--Comparison of Minimum Approach Distances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance (m)
---------------------------------------------------
Phase-to-ground exposure Phase-to-phase exposure
---------------------------------------------------
Nominal voltage in kilovolts phase to phase* Proposed Proposed
IEEE 516- tables R-6 IEEE 516- tables R-6
2009 and V- 2009 and V-2
2[dagger] [dagger]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.051 to 0.300.............................................. Avoid contact
Avoid contact
---------------------------------------------------
0.301 to 0.750.............................................. 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.31
0.751 to 15.0............................................... 0.64 0.65 0.67 0.67
15.1 to 36.0................................................ 0.73 0.77 0.84 0.86
36.1 to 46.0................................................ 0.79 0.84 0.94 0.96
46.1 to 72.5................................................ 0.89 1.00 1.15 1.20
72.6 to 121................................................. 1.01 0.95 1.37 1.29
138 to 145.................................................. 1.15 1.09 1.62 1.50
161 to 169.................................................. 1.29 1.22 1.88 1.71
230 to 242.................................................. 1.71 1.59 2.77 2.27
345 to 362.................................................. 2.75 2.59 4.32 3.80
500 to 550.................................................. 3.61 3.42 6.01 5.50
765 to 800.................................................. 4.82 4.53 8.87 7.91
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The voltage ranges correspond to those in OSHA's 2005 proposal. IEEE Standard 516-2009 has additional voltage
ranges below 72.5 kV and has one additional higher voltage range, 362.1 to 420 kV. The distances shown in this
table for IEEE Standard 516-2009 correspond to the minimum approach distance for the highest voltage in the
range.
[dagger] See 70 FR 34822, June 15, 2005.
As can be seen from Table 3, the IEEE's approach in the new version
of Standard 516 results in the following relative differences in
minimum distances:
(1) Phase-to-ground and phase-to-phase exposures at voltages from
751 volts to 72.5 kV. The minimum approach distances in IEEE Standard
516-2009 for voltages from 751 volts to 72.5 kV are approximately 10
percent smaller than the corresponding values in OSHA's 2005 proposal.
It should be noted that, at these voltages, the minimum approach
distances in both OSHA's proposal and IEEE Standard 516-2009 reflect
minimum air insulation distances, not minimum tool insulation
distances.
(2) Phase-to-phase exposures at 72.6 kV and higher. The revised
IEEE standard results in increases in minimum approach distances
compared to OSHA's 2005 proposal, with substantial increases at
voltages of 230 kV and higher.
(3) Phase-to-ground exposures at 72.6 kV and higher. Smaller
increases in the revised IEEE standard compared to OSHA's 2005 proposal
are evident for phase-to-ground exposures at voltages of 72.6 kV and
higher. The increased minimum approach distances are due to the IEEE's
use of minimum tool insulation distance rather than minimum air
insulation distance as the electrical component in determining the
minimum approach distance for phase-to-ground exposures.
D. Issues on Which Comment Is Requested
OSHA continues to support the text of its 2005 proposal and has not
yet come to any conclusions as to whether the minimum approach
distances in that proposal are based on faulty principles or
calculations. In light of IEEE's recently published revisions, OSHA is
reopening the record on the electric power generation, transmission,
and distribution standard to invite additional comments, evidence, and
data on the minimum approach distances proposed in 2005. In light of
the changes made in the new IEEE standard, OSHA is now seeking
additional public comment on the proposed minimum approach distances
for all voltages. OSHA is interested in public feedback on the proposed
minimum approach distances insofar as any party has specific comments
about perceived problems or concerns with the calculation methods
described in the 2005 proposal. The Agency strives to adopt a final
rule that is based on sound and up-to-date engineering and scientific
principles. Therefore, in developing the final rule based on these
principles, OSHA will review the comments received in response to this
notice, as well as evidence and other information gathered at the
public hearing and in any posthearing comment period, including
information provided in response to the following questions:
1. Should OSHA adopt minimum approach distances that are different
from those proposed in subpart V Tables V-2 through V-6 and proposed
Sec. 1910.269 Tables R-6 through R-10 and, if so, what criteria and
methodology are reasonably necessary to protect employees from hazards
associated with sparkover?
2. Is there any scientific basis for not extrapolating the
saturation factor, a, beyond the limits of the test data on which
earlier (that is, pre-2009) versions of IEEE Standard 516 relied? Is
there any test data that can be used to validate or invalidate the use
of extrapolated values for a?
3. Does the new IEEE methodology for calculating minimum approach
distances for phase-to-phase exposures at voltages of 72.6 kV and
higher represent employee exposure conditions better than the
methodology OSHA used to generate the minimum approach distances in the
2005 proposal? In particular, is the use of conductor-to-conductor test
data modified with the use of a 3.3-meter floating electrode preferable to
the use of rod-to-rod test data for representing the range of employee
exposure conditions?
4. All of the minimum approach distances in the 2005 proposed rule
are based on the minimum air insulation distance. Should the minimum
approach distances for voltages of 72.6 kV and higher be based on the
minimum tool insulation distance, as is the case in the 2007 NESC?
Should the minimum approach distances for voltages of 72.5 kV and lower
also be based on the minimum tool insulation distance?
5. IEEE Standard 516-2009 does not provide minimum tool insulation
distances for phase-to-phase exposures. Using an insulated boom on the
top or middle conductor in a vertical configuration and using a live-
line rope in a similar position involve the use of an insulator across
the air gap between two phases. Are there any other situations in which
an insulator or a live-line tool is used between two phase conductors
during live-line work? If, in the final rule, OSHA bases minimum
approach distances on minimum tool insulation distances, but adopts
IEEE's methodology to calculate phase-to-phase minimum approach
distances, how, if at all, should the final rule address situations in
which insulation is present across the air gap?
6. Existing Sec. 1910.269 and OSHA's 2005 proposal set maximum
transient overvoltages of 3.0 per unit for voltages up to 362 kV, 2.4
per unit for voltages in the 552-kV range, and 2.0 per unit for
voltages in the 800-kV range. The committee and the electric utility
industry, as reflected in the NESC and earlier editions of IEEE
Standard 516, believed that these were the highest possible transient
overvoltages. However, IEEE Standard 516-2009 now recognizes that even
higher maximum per-unit transient overvoltages can exist. How, if at
all, should the final rule address the possibility of higher maximum
transient overvoltages given that the proposed rule did not address
this possibility?
7. In drafting the final rule, should OSHA include the 362.1- to
420-kV voltage range appearing in IEEE Standard 516-2009 in addition to
the voltage ranges in the proposed rule? Do any existing systems
operate at these voltages?
8. OSHA does not anticipate that revising the minimum approach
distances using one of the methods outlined in this notice will have a
substantial impact on compliance costs. However, the Agency realizes
that some companies might be affected by revised minimum approach
distances. Would revised minimum approach distances in accordance with
one or more of the methods described in this notice impose additional
compliance costs? If so, explain the reasons for these costs and the
frequency with which they will be incurred.
OSHA is reopening the record solely on issues related to minimum
approach distances. The record is not being reopened on any other
issue.
E. Informal Public Hearing
As previously noted, OSHA received a request to conduct a public
hearing from EEI in response to the October 2008 reopening notice (see
Document ID: OSHA-S215-2006-0063-0530). Based on this request, the
Agency is scheduling an informal public hearing to address the limited
issues related to the minimum approach distances described in this
notice. OSHA will make witnesses available at the hearing to provide
testimony and to take questions about the minimum approach distances
proposed in 2005. The Agency is relying on the public to provide
testimony and evidence on the strengths and weaknesses of the
principles, calculations, and minimum approach distances set forth in
IEEE Standard 516-2009. The public must use the following procedures to
participate in the hearing.
Informal public hearings--purpose, rules, and procedures. Pursuant
to section 6(b)(3) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 655), OSHA invites interested persons to
participate in this rulemaking by attending the public hearing and
providing oral testimony and documentary evidence on the limited issues
related to minimum approach distances raised in this notice. OSHA also
welcomes any data or other evidence that will assist the Agency in
developing a complete and accurate record on these issues.
The informal public hearing on minimum approach distances will be
held on October 28, 2009, from 9:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m., ET, in Room
N3437A, B, and C at the U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. An administrative law judge (ALJ)
will preside over the hearing and will be responsible for resolving any
procedural matters that arise.
The legislative history of Section 6 of the OSH Act, as well as
OSHA's rules governing public hearings (29 CFR 1911.15), establish the
purpose and procedures of informal public hearings. Although the
presiding officer of such hearings is an ALJ and questioning witnesses
is allowed on crucial issues, the proceeding is largely informal and
essentially legislative in purpose. Therefore, the hearing provides
interested persons with an opportunity to make oral presentations in
the absence of procedural restraints or rigid procedures that could
impede or protract the rulemaking process. In addition, the primary
purpose of the hearing is to gather information and clarify the record;
the hearing will be an informal administrative proceeding rather than
an adjudicative one in which the technical rules of evidence apply.
OSHA's rules governing public hearings and the prehearing guidelines
that the ALJ issues for the hearings will ensure fairness and due
process for participants, as well as facilitate the development of a
clear, accurate, and complete record. Accordingly, application of these
rules and guidelines will be such that questions of relevance,
procedure, and participation generally will be resolved in favor of
development of the record.
The conduct of the hearing will conform to OSHA's Rules of
Procedure for Promulgating, Modifying, or Revoking Occupational Safety
and Health Standards (29 CFR part 1911). The rules also specify that
the Assistant Secretary may, on reasonable notice, issue additional or
alternative procedures to expedite the proceedings, to provide greater
procedural protections to interested persons or to further any other
good cause consistent with applicable law (29 CFR 1911.4). Although the
ALJs who preside over the hearings make no decisions or recommendations
on the merits of OSHA proposed rules, they do have the responsibility
and authority necessary to ensure that the hearing progresses at a
reasonable pace and in an orderly manner and to ensure that interested
persons receive a full and fair hearing. Accordingly, ALJs have the
power to regulate the course of the proceedings; dispose of procedural
requests, objections, and comparable matters; confine presentations to
matters pertinent to the issues this reopening notice raises; use
appropriate means to regulate the conduct of persons present at the
hearing; question witnesses and permit others to do so; limit the time
for such questioning; and leave the record open for a reasonable time
after the hearing for the submission of additional data, evidence,
comments and arguments (29 CFR 1911.16).
Notice of intention to appear at the hearing. Interested persons
who intend to participate in and provide oral testimony or documentary
evidence at the hearing must file a written notice of intention to appear by
October 1, 2009. To testify or question witnesses at the hearing,
interested persons must submit (transmit, postmark, or deliver) a
notice by October 1, 2009, providing the following information:
Name, address, and telephone number of each individual who
will give oral testimony;
Name of the establishment or organization each individual
represents, if any;
Occupational title and position of each individual
testifying;
Approximate amount of time required for each individual's
testimony;
A brief statement of the position each individual will
take with respect to the issues identified in this notice; and
A brief summary of documentary evidence each individual
intends to present.
OSHA emphasizes that the hearings are open to the public; however,
only individuals who file a notice of intention to appear may question
witnesses and participate fully at the hearing. If time permits, and at
the discretion of the ALJ, an individual who did not file a notice of
intention to appear may be allowed to testify at the hearing, but for
no more than 10 minutes.
Hearing testimony and documentary evidence. Individuals who request
more than 10 minutes to present their oral testimony at the hearing or
who will submit documentary evidence at the hearing must submit
(transmit, postmark, or deliver) the full text of their testimony and
all documentary evidence no later than October 15, 2009.
The Agency will review each submission and determine if the
information it contains warrants the amount of time the individual
requested for the presentation. If OSHA believes the requested time is
excessive, the Agency will allocate an appropriate amount of time for
the presentation and will notify the individual of that action, and the
reasons for that action, before the hearing. The Agency may limit to 10
minutes the presentation of any participant who fails to comply
substantially with these procedural requirements, and may request that
the participant return for questioning later. Before the hearing, OSHA
will notify all participants of the time the Agency is allowing for
their presentations and will provide them with prehearing guidelines
and a hearing schedule.
Certification of the hearing record and Agency final determination.
Following the close of the hearing and any posthearing comment periods,
the ALJ will certify the record to the Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health. The record will consist of all of the
written comments, oral testimony, and documentary evidence received
during the proceeding. The ALJ, however, will not make or recommend any
decisions as to the content of the final standard. Following
certification of the record, OSHA will review the record and issue the
final rule based on the record as a whole.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1926
Electric power, Fire prevention, Hazardous substances, Occupational
safety and health, Safety.
Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under the direction of Jordan Barab,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health,
U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210. It is issued pursuant to sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657),
Secretary's Order 5-2007 (72 FR 31160), and 29 CFR part 1911.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of September 2009.
Jordan Barab,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-22002 Filed 9-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
