SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR THE

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS OF THE

METHYLENE CHLORIDE STANDARD (29 CFR 1910.1052)

(OMB CONTROL NO. 1218-0179 (August 2011))

JUSTIFICATION

1.  Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information
necessary.  Identify any legal or administrative requirements that
necessitate the collection.  Attach a copy of the appropriate section of
each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of
information.

The main objective of the Occupational Safety and Health (“OSH Act”)
is to “assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the
Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human
resources” (29 U.S.C. 651).  To achieve this objective, the OSH Act
specifically authorizes “the development and promulgation of
occupational safety and health standards” (29 U.S.C. 651).

To protect employee health, the OSH Act authorizes the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA” or “Agency”) to develop
standards that provide for “monitoring or measuring employee
exposure” to occupational hazards and “prescribe the type and
frequency of medical examinations and other tests which shall be made
available [by the employer] to employees exposed to such hazards . . .
to most effectively determine whether the health of such employees is
adversely affected by such exposure” (29 U.S.C. 655). The OSH Act also
mandates that “[e]ach employer shall make, keep and preserve, and make
available to the Secretary [of Labor] . . . such records regarding
[their] activities relating to this Act as the Secretary . . . may
prescribe by regulation as necessary or appropriate for the enforcement
of the Act or for developing information regarding the causes and
prevention of occupational accidents and illnesses” (29 U.S.C. 657). 
In addition, the OSH Act directs the Agency to “issue regulations
requiring employers to maintain accurate records of employee exposures
to potentially toxic materials or other harmful physical agents which
are required to be monitored and measured,” and further specifies that
such regulations provide “for each employee or former employee to have
access to such records as will indicate [their] own exposure to toxic
materials or harmful physical agents” (29 U.S.C. 657).  The OSH Act
states further that “[t]he Secretary. . . shall prescribe such rules
and regulations as [he/she] may deem necessary to carry out [his/her]
responsibilities under this Act, including rules and regulations dealing
with the inspection of an employer’s establishment” (29 U.S.C. 651).


Under the authority granted by the OSH Act, OSHA published a health
standard regulating employee exposure to methylene chloride (the
“Standard”; 29 CFR 1910.1052, 29 CFR 1915.1052, and 29 CFR
1926.1152.).  The basis for the Standard was a determination by OSHA
that occupational exposure to methylene chloride (MC) poses a hazard to
employees.  MC is a solvent used for such applications as paint
stripping, polyurethane-form manufacturing, cleaning, and degreasing. 
Inhalation and skin exposure are the predominant means of employee
exposure to MC.  Inhaling MC vapor causes mental confusion,
light-headedness, nausea, vomiting, and headache.  With acute or
short-term exposure, MC acts as an anesthetic; prolonged exposure may
cause staggering, unconsciousness, and even death.  High concentrations
of MC vapors may cause eye and respiratory tract irritation, and
aggravate angina symptoms.  Skin contact with liquid MC causes
irritation and burns, while splashing MC into eyes causes irritation. 
Studies on laboratory animals indicate that long-term (chronic) exposure
causes cancer.  Employees exposed to MC are at increased risk of
developing cancer, adverse heart effects, central nervous system and
liver damage, and severe skin or eye irritation.  Items 2 and 12 below
list and describe the specific information collection requirements of
the Standard.

2.  Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be
used.  Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency
has made of the information received from the current collection.

A.  Exposure monitoring (§1910.1052(d))

Initial determination (§1910.1052(d)(2)) -- Each employer whose
employees are exposed to MC shall perform initial exposure monitoring to
determine each affected employee's exposure, except under the following
conditions:

§1910.1052(d)(2)(i) -- Where objective data demonstrate that MC cannot
be released in the workplace in airborne concentrations at or above the
action level or above the STEL.   The objective data shall represent the
highest MC exposures likely to occur under reasonably foreseeable
conditions of processing, use, or handling.  The employer shall document
the objective data exemption as specified in paragraph (m) of this
section;

§1910.1052(d)(2)(ii) -- Where the employer has performed exposure
monitoring within 12 months prior to April 10, 1997 and that exposure
monitoring meets all other requirements of this section, and was
conducted under conditions substantially equivalent to existing
conditions; or

§1910.1052(d)(2)(iii) -- Where employees are exposed to MC on fewer
than 30 days per year (e.g., on a construction site), and the employer
has measurements by direct-reading instruments which give immediate
results (such as a detector tube) and which provide sufficient
information regarding employee exposures to determine what control
measures are necessary to reduce exposures to acceptable levels.

Purpose:  Initial monitoring assists employers in identifying areas of
operation that may require additional efforts to reduce exposure and
come into compliance with the Standard.  Initial monitoring results also
assist employers in determining the need for engineering controls,
instituting or modifying work practices, and selecting appropriate
respiratory protection to prevent employee overexposure.  This
information also determines whether or not the employer must perform
periodic monitoring.

Periodic monitoring (§1910.1052(d)(3)) -- Where the initial
determination shows employee exposures at or above the action level or
above the STEL, the employer shall establish an exposure monitoring
program for periodic monitoring of employee exposure to MC in accordance
with Table 1:

Table 1

	Employee Exposure	

	Monitoring Frequency



Below the AL and at or below the STEL.	

No 8-hour TWA or STEL monitoring required.



Below the AL and above the STEL.	

No 8-hour TWA exposure monitoring required; must assess STEL every 3
months.



At or above the AL, at or below the TWA, and at or below the STEL.	

Monitor 8-hour TWA every 6 months.



At or above the AL, at or below the TWA, and above the STEL.	

Monitor 8-hour TWA every 6 months and STEL every 3 months.



Above the TWA and at or below the STEL.	

Monitor 8-hour TWA every 3 months.



Above the TWA and above the STEL.	

Monitor 8-hour TWA and STEL every 3 months.



Purpose:  Periodic monitoring is appropriate because relatively minor
changes in processes, materials, or ambient conditions may affect
airborne concentrations of MC; therefore, by using periodic monitoring,
employers can evaluate the effectiveness of selected control methods. 
In addition, periodic measurements remind both the employer and employee
of the continued need to protect against the hazards that can result
from overexposure to MC.

Additional monitoring (§1910.1052(d)(4)(1)) -- The employer shall
perform exposure monitoring when a change in workplace conditions
indicates that employee exposure may have increased. Examples of
situations that may require additional monitoring include changes in
production, process, control equipment, or work practices, or a leak,
rupture, or other breakdown.

Purpose:  Additional monitoring ensures that the workplace is safe, or
alerts the employer to the need to increase employee protection.

Employee notification of monitoring results (§1910.1052(d)(5)(i)) --
The employer shall, within 15 working days after the receipt of the
results of any monitoring performed under this section, notify each
affected employee of these results in writing, either individually or by
posting of results in an appropriate location that is accessible to
affected employees.

§1910.1052(d)(5)(ii) -- Whenever monitoring results indicate that
employee exposure is above the 8-hour TWA PEL or the STEL, the employer
shall describe in the written notification the corrective action being
taken to reduce employee exposure to or below the 8-hour TWA PEL or STEL
and the schedule for completion of this action.

Purpose:  Notification provides employees with information about the
efforts the employer is taking to lower their MC exposures and to
furnish them with a safe and healthful workplace in accordance with
section 8(c)(3) of the Act.

B.  Regulated areas (§1910.1052(e)) 

§1910.1052(e)(6) The employer shall demarcate regulated areas from the
rest of the workplace in any manner that adequately establishes and
alerts employees to the boundaries of the area and minimizes the number
of authorized employees exposed to MC within the regulated area. 

Purpose:  The purpose of a regulated area is to ensure that the employer
makes workers aware of the presence of MC at levels above the PEL or
STEL, and to limit exposure to as few employees as possible.  

§1910.1052(e)(7) -- An employer at a multi-employer worksite who
establishes a regulated area shall communicate the access restrictions
and locations of these areas to all other employers with work operations
at that worksite.   

Purpose:  This requirement protects the workers of the other employers
by ensuring that they avoid the regulated areas or are properly
protected if they enter a regulated area.  

Respiratory protection (§1910.1052(g))

Respirator program (§1910.1052(g)(2)) 

(i) The employer must implement a respiratory protection program in
accordance with §1910.13[4](b) through (m) (except (d)(1)(iii)), which
covers each employee required by this section to use a respirator. 

Purpose:  To ensure that employers establish a standardized procedure
for selecting, using, and maintaining respirators for each workplace
that requires respirator use.  Developing written procedures ensures
that employers implement the required respirator program in an effective
and reliable manner that addresses the unique characteristics (including
chemical hazards) of the workplace.  

Medical evaluation (§1910.1052(g)(4)) - Before having an employee use a
supplied-air respirator in the negative-pressure mode, or a gas mask
with an organic-vapor canister for emergency escape, the employer must: 

§1910.1052(g)(4)(i) -- Have a physician or other licensed health-care
professional (PLHCP) evaluate the employee's ability to use such
respiratory protection.

§1910.1052(g)(4)(ii) -- Ensure that the PLHCP provides their findings
in a written opinion to the employee and the employer.

Purpose:  The medical evaluation provides the employer and employee with
assurance that the employee can safely use the respirators covered by
this provision.

D.  Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j))

Affected Employees (§1910.1052(j)(1)) -- The employer shall make
medical surveillance available for employees who are or may be exposed
to MC as follows:

§1910.1052(j)(1)(i) -- At or above the action level on 30 or more days
per year, or above the 8-hour TWA PEL or the STEL on 10 or more days per
year;

§1910.1052(j)(1)(ii) -- Above the 8-TWA PEL or STEL for any time period
where an employee has been identified by a physician or other licensed
health care professional as being at risk from cardiac disease or from
some other serious MC-related health condition and such employee
requests inclusion in the medical surveillance program;

§1910.1052(j)(1)(iii) -- During an emergency.

Frequency of Medical Surveillance: Initial Surveillance, Periodic
Medical Surveillance, Termination of Employment or Reassignment, and
Additional Surveillance (§ 1910.1052(j)(4)(i)-(j)(4)(iv))

Frequency of medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)) -- The employer
shall make medical surveillance available to each affected employee as
follows:

Initial surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)(i)) -- The employer shall
provide initial medical surveillance under the schedule provided by
paragraph (n)(2)(iii) of this section, or before the time of initial
assignment of the employee, whichever is later. The employer need not
provide the initial surveillance if medical records show that an
affected employee has been provided with medical surveillance that
complies with this section within 12 months before April 10, 1997.

Periodic medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)(ii)) -- The employer
shall update the medical and work history for each affected employee
annually. The employer shall provide periodic physical examinations,
including appropriate laboratory surveillance, as follows:

§1910.1052(j)(4)(ii)(A) -- For employees 45 years of age or older,
within 12 months of the initial surveillance or any subsequent medical
surveillance; and

§1910.1052(j)(4)(ii)(B) -- For employees younger than 45 years of age,
within 36 months of the initial surveillance or any subsequent medical
surveillance.

Termination of employment or reassignment (§1910.1052(j)(4)(iii)) --
When an employee leaves the employer's workplace, or is reassigned to an
area where exposure to MC is consistently at or below the action level
and STEL, medical surveillance shall be made available if six months or
more have elapsed since the last medical surveillance.

Additional surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)(iv)) -- The employer shall
provide additional medical surveillance at frequencies other than those
listed above when recommended in the written medical opinion.   (For
example, the physician or other licensed health care professional may
determine an examination is warranted in less than 36 months for
employees younger than 45 years of age based upon evaluation of the
results of the annual medical and work history.)

Purpose:  The medical-surveillance program specified by the Standard
enables employers to determine if any employees have underlying health
conditions that places them at increased risk if exposed to MC, to
insofar as possible, early or mild clinical conditions related to MC
exposure so that they can take appropriate preventive measures; and
identify any diseases that occur as a result of MC exposure.

Documentation and maintenance of medical-surveillance results provide a
continuous record of employee health.  PLHCPs use these records to
determine the extent to which employees, subsequent to their last
medical examination, experience health effects related to MC exposure. 
Further, if symptoms of organic damage appear, the PLHCP often needs
information about an employee’s previous medical conditions to make an
accurate diagnosis of the new condition, ascertain its apparent cause,
and identify a course of treatment.  Medical records also permit
employees to determine whether or not they need treatment, or to
evaluate the effectiveness of their employer’s exposure-reduction
program.

Information provided to the physician or other licensed health care
professional (§1910.1052(j)(8))

The employer shall provide the following information to a physician or
other licensed health care professional who is involved in the diagnosis
of MC-induced health effects:

§1910.1052(j)(8)(i) -- A copy of this section including its applicable
appendices;

§1910.1052(j)(8)(ii) -- A description of the affected employee's past,
current and anticipated future duties as they relate to the employee's
MC exposure;

§1910.1052(j)(8)(iii) -- The employee's former or current exposure
levels or, for employees not yet occupationally exposed to MC, the
employee's anticipated exposure levels and the frequency and exposure
levels anticipated to be associated with emergencies;

§1910.1052(j)(8)(iv) -- A description of any personal protective
equipment, such as respirators, used or to be used; and

§1910.1052(j)(8)(v) -- Information from previous employment-related
medical surveillance of the affected employee which is not otherwise
available to the physician or other licensed health care professional.

Purpose:  Making this information available to PLHCPs assists them in
evaluating the employee's health and fitness for specific job
assignments involving MC exposure.  The PLHCP uses this information to
determine if an observed health condition involves MC exposure and, if
so, the need to reduce the employee’s MC exposure.  Accordingly, if
symptoms of organic damage appear, the PLHCP must obtain information
about an employee’s previous medical conditions to make an accurate
diagnosis of the new condition, its apparent cause, and the course of
treatment required.  The information also notifies the PLHCP regarding
the existence and extent of potential sources of occupational diseases. 
In addition, medical records allow employees to determine whether or not
they require treatment, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the
employer’s exposure-reduction program.

Written medical opinions (§1910.1052(j)(9))

§1910.1052(j)(9)(i) -- For each physical examination required by this
section, the employer shall ensure that the physician or other licensed
health care professional provides to the employer and to the affected
employee a written opinion regarding the results of that examination
within 15 days of completion of the evaluation of medical and laboratory
findings, but not more than 30 days after the examination. The written
medical opinion shall be limited to the following information: 

§1910.1052(j)(9)(i)(A) -- The physician or other licensed health care
professional's opinion concerning whether exposure to MC may contribute
to or aggravate the employee's existing cardiac, hepatic, neurological
(including stroke) or dermal disease or whether the employee has any
other medical condition(s) that would place the employee's health at
increased risk of material impairment from exposure to MC.

§1910.1052(j)(9)(i)(B) -- Any recommended limitations upon the
employee's exposure to MC, including removal from MC exposure, or upon
the employee's use of respirators, protective clothing, or other
protective equipment.

§1910.1052(j)(9)(i)(C) -- A statement that the employee has been
informed by the physician or other licensed health care professional
that MC is a potential occupational carcinogen, of risk factors for
heart disease, and the potential for exacerbation of underlying heart
disease by exposure to MC through its metabolism to carbon monoxide; and

§1910.1052(j)(9)(i)(D) -- A statement that the employee has been
informed by the physician or other licensed health care professional of
the results of the medical examination and any medical conditions
resulting from MC exposure which require further explanation or
treatment.

§1910.1052(j)(9)(ii) -- The employer shall instruct the physician or
other licensed health care professional not to reveal to the employer,
orally or in the written opinion, any specific records, findings, and
diagnoses that have no bearing on occupational exposure to MC. 

Purpose:  The Standard requires the PLHCP to supply a copy of the
written medical opinion directly to both the employer and the employee.
Providing copies of the same written opinion both to the employer and
the employee ensures that the employer is aware of any factors that may
influence work assignments or choice of personal protective equipment.  

Medical removal protection (MRP) (§1910.1052(j)(11)) 

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(A) -- Except as provided in paragraph (j)(10) of
this section, when a medical determination recommends removal because
the employee's exposure to MC may contribute to or aggravate the
employee's existing cardiac, hepatic, neurological (including stroke),
or skin disease, the employer must provide medical removal protection
benefits to the employee and either:

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(A)(1) -- Transfer the employee to comparable work
where methylene chloride exposure is below the action level; or

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(A)(2) -- Remove the employee from MC exposure. 

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(B) -- If comparable work is not available and the
employer is able to demonstrate that removal and the costs of extending
MRP benefits to an additional employee, considering feasibility in
relation to the size of the employer's business and the other
requirements of this standard, make further reliance on MRP an
inappropriate remedy, the employer may retain the additional employee in
the existing job until transfer or removal becomes appropriate,
provided:

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(B)(1) -- The employer ensures that the employee
receives additional medical surveillance, including a physical
examination at least every 60 days until transfer or removal occurs; and

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(B)(2) -- The employer or PLHCP informs the
employee of the risk to the employee's health from continued MC
exposure.

§1910.1052(j)(11)(i)(C) -- The employer shall maintain in effect any
job-related protective measures or limitations, other than removal, for
as long as a medical determination recommends them to be necessary.

End of MRP benefits and return of the employee to former job status
(§1910.1052(j)(11)(ii)) 

§1910.1052(j)(11)(ii)(A) -- The employer may cease providing MRP
benefits at the earliest of the following:

§1910.1052(j)(11)(ii)(A)(1) -- Six months;

§1910.1052(j)(11)(ii)(A)(2) -- Return of the employee to the employee's
former job status following receipt of a medical determination
concluding that the employee's exposure to MC no longer will aggravate
any cardiac, hepatic, neurological (including stroke), or dermal
disease;

§1910.1052(j)(11)(ii)(A)(3) - Receipt of a medical determination
concluding that the employee can never return to MC exposure.

Purpose:  This provision prevents the risk of further physical
debilitation resulting from serious MC-related medical conditions among
employees who have MC exposures at or above the AL.

Multiple health care professional review mechanism (§1910.1052(j)(14))

§1910.1052(j)(14)(i) -- If the employer selects the initial physician
or licensed health care professional (PLHCP) to conduct any medical
examination or consultation provided to an employee under this paragraph
(j)(11), the employer shall notify the employee of the right to seek a
second medical opinion each time the employer provides the employee with
a copy of the written opinion of that PLHCP.

*	*	*

§1910.1052(j)(14)(iii) -- If the findings, determinations or
recommendations of the second PLHCP differ from those of the initial
PLHCP, then the employer and the employee shall instruct the two health
care professionals to resolve the disagreement.

*	*	*

Purpose:  If an employer selects the PLHCP to perform any medical
examinations or consultations required in paragraph (j)(11), they must
notify employees, when the employer provides them with a copy of the
PLHCP’s written medical opinion, of their right to seek a second
opinion.  If an employee disagrees with the medical opinion provided by
the employer-selected PLHCP, the employer must pay for a PLHCP chosen by
the employee to review any findings, determinations, or recommendations
of the first PLHCP, and to conduct any examinations, consultations, and
laboratory tests they deem necessary to complete the review.  

If the opinions of the two PLHCPs differ, and they are unable to resolve
their disagreement they must jointly designate a specialist in the field
at issue to review, at the employer’s expense, the findings,
determinations, or recommendations of the first two PLHCPs.  The
specialist can then conduct such examinations, consultations, and
laboratory tests, as well as discussions with the first two PLHCPs, that
they believe are necessary to resolve the disagreement other the prior
PLHCPs.  The written opinion of the specialist is the definitive medical
determination.

The Agency identified only two minor paperwork requirements for
employers in this provision.  The first, in paragraph (j)(14)(i),
specifies that employers must notify employees, after the employees
receive a medical opinion, of their right to seek a second medical
opinion.  Second, paragraph (j)(14)(iii) addresses conflicting medical
opinions rendered by two PLHCPs by requiring employers (and employees)
to instruct the two PLHCPs to resolve their disagreement.  OSHA believes
that employers notify employees of their right to a second opinion by
having PLHCPs include a standardized notification in the written medical
opinions they send to employees.  Informing the two PLHCPs to resolve a
disagreement is a rare event that takes less than 1 minute to perform if
required.  As these paperwork requirements impose minimal hour and cost
burdens on employers, the Agency is not including them in this ICR.

OSHA believes that multiple-physician review improves employee
participation in an employer’s medical-surveillance program, thereby
increasing early detection and treatment MC-related diseases.  However,
program participation is strictly voluntary on the part of employees. 
If the medical opinion provided by the employer’s PLHCP could result
in job removal, and no opportunity exists for employees to obtain a
second medical opinion, many of them would refuse to participate in the
medical-surveillance program.

E.  Hazard communication (§1910.1052(k))

The employer shall communicate the following hazards associated with MC
on labels and in material safety data sheets in accordance with the
requirements of the Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200, 29
CFR 1915.1200, or 29 CFR 1926.59, as appropriate: cancer, cardiac
effects (including elevation of carboxyhemoglobin), central nervous
system effects, liver effects, and skin and eye irritation. 

Purpose:  OSHA believes that this notification requirement protects
employees by alerting them to potential MC exposure, thereby allowing
them to take appropriate actions to control this exposure.  In addition,
this requirement supplements the hazard-recognition training employees
receive under the Standard.

F.  Employee information and training (§1910.1052(l))

§1910.1052(l)(1) -- The employer shall provide information and training
for each affected employee prior to or at the time of initial assignment
to a job involving potential exposure to MC.

§1910.1052(l)(2) -- The employer shall ensure that information and
training is presented in a manner that is understandable to the
employees.

§1910.1052(l)(3) -- In addition to the information required under the
Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1910.1200, 29 CFR 1915.1200, or
29 CFR 1926.59, as appropriate:

§1910.1052(l)(3)(i) -- The employer shall inform each affected employee
of the requirements of this section and information available in its
appendices, as well as how to access or obtain a copy of it in the
workplace;

§1910.1052(l)(3)(ii) -- Wherever an employee's exposure to airborne
concentrations of MC exceeds or can reasonably be expected to exceed the
action level, the employer shall inform each affected employee of the
quantity, location, manner of use, release, and storage of MC and the
specific operations in the workplace that could result in exposure to
MC, particularly noting where exposures may be above the 8-hour TWA PEL
or STEL;

§1910.1052(l)(5) -- The employer shall re-train each affected employee
as necessary to ensure that each employee exposed above the action level
or the STEL maintains the requisite understanding of the principles of
safe use and handling of MC in the workplace.

§1910.1052(l)(6) -- Whenever there are workplace changes, such as
modifications of tasks or procedures or the institution of new tasks or
procedures, which increase employee exposure, and where those exposures
exceed or can reasonably be expected to exceed the action level, the
employer shall update the training as necessary to ensure that each
affected employee has the requisite proficiency.

§1910.1052(l)(7) -- An employer whose employees are exposed to MC at a
multi-employer worksite shall notify the other employers with work
operations at that site in accordance with the requirements of the
Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200, 29 CFR 1915.1200, or 29
CFR 1926.59, as appropriate.

§1910.1052(l)(8) -- The employer shall provide to the Assistant
Secretary or the Director, upon request, all available materials
relating to employee information and training.

Purpose:  Training is essential to inform employees of the health
hazards resulting from MC exposure and to provide them with the
understanding necessary to minimize these hazards.  Training also
enables employees to recognize operations and locations associated with
MC exposures.

G.  Recordkeeping (§1910.1052(m))

Objective Data (§1910.1052(m)(7)(i)) -- Where an employer seeks to
demonstrate that initial monitoring is unnecessary through reasonable
reliance on objective data showing that any materials in the workplace
containing MC will not release MC at levels which exceed the action
level or the STEL under foreseeable conditions of exposure, the employer
shall establish and maintain an accurate record of the objective data
relied upon in support of the exemption.

§1910.1052(m)(1)(ii)(A) -- The MC-containing material in question;

§1910.1052(m)(1)(ii)(B) -- The source of the objective data;

§1910.1052(m)(1)(ii)(C) -- The testing protocol, results of testing,
and/or analysis of the material for the release of MC;

§1910.1052(m)(1)(ii)(D) -- A description of the operation exempted
under paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section and how the data support the
exemption; and

§1910.1052(m)(1)(ii)(E) -- Other data relevant to the operations,
materials, processing, or employee exposures covered by the exemption.

§1910.1052(m)(1)(iii) -- The employer shall maintain this record for
the duration of the employer's reliance upon such objective data. 

Purpose:  Maintaining the records allows OSHA to ascertain whether or
not employers are complying with the Standard, thereby ensuring that
employees are receiving adequate protection from MC exposures.  In
addition, employees and their representatives have access to these
records, thereby providing assurance that the employer’s application
of the exception is reasonable.

Exposure measurements (§1910.1052(m)(2)) 

§1910.1052(m)(2)(i) -- The employer shall establish and keep an
accurate record of all measurements taken to monitor employee exposure
to MC as prescribed in paragraph (d) of this section.

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii) -- Where the employer has 20 or more employees,
this record shall include at least the following information:

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(A) -- The date of measurement for each sample
taken;

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(B) -- The operation involving exposure to MC which
is being monitored;

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(C) -- Sampling and analytical methods used and
evidence of their accuracy;

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(D) -- Number, duration, and results of samples
taken;

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(E) -- Type of personal protective equipment, such
as respiratory protective devices, worn, if any; and

§1910.1052(m)(2)(ii)(F) -- Name, social security number, job
classification and exposure of all of the employees represented by
monitoring, indicating which employees were actually monitored.

§1910.1052(m)(2)(iii) -- Where the employer has fewer than 20
employees, the record shall include at least the following information:

§1910.1052(m)(2)(iii)(A) -- The date of measurement for each sample
taken;

§1910.1052(m)(2)(iii)(B) -- Number, duration, and results of samples
taken; and

§1910.1052(m)(2)(iii)(C) -- Name, social security number, job
classification and exposure of all of the employees represented by
monitoring, indicating which employees were actually monitored.

§1910.1052(m)(2)(iv) -- The employer shall maintain this record for at
least thirty (30) years, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1020.

Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(m)(3)) 

§1910.1052(m)(3)(i) -- The employer shall establish and maintain an
accurate record for each employee subject to medical surveillance under
paragraph (j) of this section.

§1910.1052(m)(3)(ii) -- The record shall include at least the following
information:

§1910.1052(m)(3)(ii)(A) -- The name, social security number and
description of the duties of the employee;

§1910.1052(m)(3)(ii)(B) -- Written medical opinions; and

§1910.1052(m)(3)(ii)(C) -- Any employee medical conditions related to
exposure to MC.

§1910.1052(m)(3)(iii) -- The employer shall ensure that this record is
maintained for the duration of employment plus thirty (30) years, in
accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1020.

Availability (§1910.1052(m)(4)) 

§1910.1052(m)(4)(i) -- The employer, upon written request, shall make
all records required to be maintained by this section available to the
Assistant Secretary and the Director for examination and copying in
accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1020. 

[Note to paragraph (m)(4)(i): All records required to be maintained by
this section may be kept in the most administratively convenient form
(for example, electronic or computer records would satisfy this
requirement).]

§1910.1052(m)(4)(ii) -- The employer, upon request, shall make any
employee exposure and objective data records required by this section
available for examination and copying by affected employees, former
employees, and designated representatives in accordance with 29 CFR
1910.1020.

§1910.1052(m)(4)(iii) -- The employer, upon request, shall make
employee medical records required to be kept by this section available
for examination and copying by the subject employee and by anyone having
the specific written consent of the subject employee in accordance with
29 CFR 1910.1020.

Purpose:  An OSHA compliance officer uses these records to assess
employer compliance with the major requirements of the Standard. 
Employees and their designated representatives use exposure-monitoring
and medical-surveillance records to assess employee medical status over
the course of employment, to evaluate the effectiveness of the
employer’s exposure-reduction program, and for other reasons.

Accordingly, access to these records is necessary to provide both direct
and indirect improvements in the detection, treatment, and prevention of
occupational exposure to MC.

  

3.  Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information
involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the
basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection.  Also,
describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce the
burden.

Employers may use improved information technology when establishing and
maintaining the required records.  OSHA wrote the paperwork requirement
of the Standard in performance-oriented language, i.e., in term of what
data to collect, not how to record the data.

4.  Describe efforts to identify duplication.  Show specifically why any
similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use
of the purposes described in Item 2 above.

The information collection requirements of the Standard are specific to
each employer and employee involved, and no other source or agency
duplicates these requirements or can make the required information
available to the Agency (i.e., the required information is available
only from employers).

5.  If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other
small entities, describe any methods used to minimize burden.

The information collection requirements of the Standard do not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

6.  Describe the consequences to Federal program or policy activities if
the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well
as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

The information collection frequencies specified by the Standard are the
minimum frequencies that the Agency believes are necessary to ensure
that the employer and OSHA can effectively monitor the exposure and
health status of employees working with MC.

7.  Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information
collection to be conducted in a manner:

·  Requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often
than quarterly;

·  Requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection
of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

·  Requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies
of any document;

·  Requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical,
government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three
years;

·  In connection with a statistical survey that is not designed to
produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the
universe of study;

·  Requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not
been reviewed and approved by OMB;

 

·  That includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by
authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by
disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the
pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other
agencies for compatible confidential use; or

·  Requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secret, or other
confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has
instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentiality to
the extent permitted by law.

Paragraph (d)(5) of the Standard requires that employers, within 15
working days after receiving the results of any exposure monitoring
performed under the Standard, notify each affected employee of their
results in writing, either individually or by posting the results in an
appropriate location.  This information collection is otherwise
consistent with 5 CFR 1320.5.

8.  If applicable, provide a copy and identify the data and page number
of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice, required
by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection
prior to submission to OMB.  Summarize public comments received in
response to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in
response to these comments.  Specifically address comments received on
cost and hour burden.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain
their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the
clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting
format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or
reported.

Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to
be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at least once
every three years -- even if the collection of information activity is
the same as in prior periods.  There may be circumstances that may
preclude consultation in a specific situation.  These circumstances
should be explained.

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)), OSHA published a notice in the Federal Register on March
16, 2011 (76 FR 14432, Docket No. OSHA-2011-0060) requesting public
comment on its proposed extension of the information collection
requirements contained in the existing Standard on Methylene Chloride
(the Standard; 29 CFR 1910.1052).  The notice was part of a preclearance
consultation program intended to provide those interested parties the
opportunity to comment on OSHA’s request for an extension by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of a previous approval of the
information collection requirements in the Standard.  No public comments
were received.  

However, as a result of the Standard Improvement Project-Phase III final
rule (76 FR 33590), published on June 8, 2011, the “transfer of
records” requirement contained in the Standard (former 29 CFR §
1910.1052(m)(5)) was revoked.  In accordance with the PRA, prior to
issuance of the final rule, on May 27, 2011, OSHA submitted a revised
Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB requesting approval to
remove this requirement and the associated burden hours and costs.  On
August 11, 2011, OMB issued a Notice of Action (NOA) indicating approval
of the request.  

In addition, the NOA instructed the Department of Labor to publish a
second notice in the Federal Register to solicit comments on its
proposal to extend the Office of Management and Budget’s approval of
the information collection requirements.  In response, this ICR fulfills
the NOA instructions.  The Agency will respond to any comments submitted
in response to this notice and submit the final ICR to OMB.  

9.  Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents,
other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

The Agency will not provide payments or gifts to the respondents.

10.  Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents
and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency
policy.

To ensure that the personal information in the medical records required
by the Standard remains confidential, the Agency developed §1913.10
(“Rules of Agency Practice and Procedure Concerning OSHA Access to
Employee Medical Records”) to regulate its access to these records.

11.  Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive
nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and
other matters that are commonly considered private.  This justification
should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions
necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the
explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is
requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

The paperwork requirements specified by the Standard do not require the
collection of sensitive information.

12.  Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of
information.  The statement should:

·  Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual
hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated.  Unless
directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain
information on which to base hour burden estimates.  Consultation with a
sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is desirable.  If the
hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of
differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of
estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. 
Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for customary and
usual business practices.

·  If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide
separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour
burdens.

·  Provide estimates of annualized costs to respondents for the hour
burdens for collections of information, identifying and using
appropriate wage rate categories.

Table 1, Summary of Burden Hour Changes and Cost (attached below),
provides a summary of burden hour and cost estimates for the information
collection requirements specified by the Standard.

Burden Hour and Cost Determinations 

The Agency adopted the mean wage rates from “Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation, September 2010”, U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12082010.pdf" 
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12082010.pdf , p. 12).
Total compensation for these occupational categories includes an
adjustment for fringe benefits. On average, fringe benefits represent
29.4 percent (Ibid, p.4) of total hourly compensation in the private
sector. The total hourly compensation costs of labor used in this
analysis are:

			· Service Worker			$23.87

			· Clerical/Secretary			$22.00

			· Professional/Manager		$49.31

(A) Exposure monitoring (§1910.1052(d))

Employers can use either of the following options to determine a
worker’s 8-hour TWA or 15-minute exposure levels: first, take a
personal air sample from each employee’s breathing zone; or, second,
use the personal air samples from one worker to represent the exposures
of other workers in the same job classification, work area, and shift if
the employer expects the sampled worker to have the highest MC exposures
among these workers. For the purpose of these burden hour and cost
determinations, OSHA assumes that employers use the first option (i.e.,
individual worker samples) for exposure monitoring.

Initial determination (§1910.1052(d)(2))

During each year covered by this ICR, OSHA estimates that 2,092 new
workers are monitored initially. OSHA recognizes this is an
overestimate, as not every new worker that is exposed will require
initial monitoring. Rather, an employer may have conducted exposure
monitoring sampling using the personal air samples from one employee to
represent the exposures of other workers in the same job classification,
work area, and shift. The employer must sample the worker the employer
believes to have the highest MC exposures among these workers.
Therefore, a new worker may not need to have individual monitoring.

The Agency estimates that employers use a total of 5 passive dosimeters
to make initial 8-hour TWA and STEL determinations for each worker, and
that a professional requires 5 minutes to attach and remove each
dosimeter (for a total of 20 minutes (.33 hour) for the 4 dosimeters).
Therefore, the total annual burden hours and cost to employers for this
information collection requirement is:

Burden hours:	2,092 new workers x .33 hour = 690 hours

              Cost:	690 hours x $49.31 = $34,024

Periodic monitoring (§1910.1052(d)(3))

OSHA estimates that employers must conduct quarterly exposure monitoring
for 4,764 workers and semi-annual monitoring for 14,347 workers, with
passive dosimeters required for each worker.  As with initial monitoring
it is estimated that it will take 5 minutes to attach and remove each of
the 4 badges for a total of 20 minutes per worker (.33 hours).
Therefore, estimated yearly burden hours and cost of this information
collection requirement are: 

Burden hours:	   4,764 workers x 4 (quarterly) x .33 hours = 6,288 hours

  14,347 workers x 2 (semi-annual) x .33 hours = 9,469 hours 

					 

            Cost:	  (6,288 + 9,469) hours x $49.31 = $776,978

Additional monitoring (§1910.1052(d)(4))

Employers use additional monitoring to assess the exposure effects that
result from changes in workplace conditions (e.g., production,
processes, or controls (including work practices)), or if a leak,
rupture, or other breakdown develops that may increase worker exposures
to MC. Using percentages from the FEA, the Agency estimates that
employers perform additional monitoring on 9,541 workers each year. With
4 passive dosimeters required for each worker, and assuming that a
professional requires 20 minutes (.33 hour) to attach and remove the 4
badges, the estimated burden hours and cost to conduct additional
monitoring each year are:

Burden hours:	 9,541 workers x .33 hour = 3,149 hours

              Cost:	 3,149 hours x $49.31 = $155,277

Employee notification of monitoring results (§1910.1052(d)(5))

This provision requires employers to notify workers of their exposure
monitoring results. Notification must occur within 15 days after the
employer receives the results, either by providing each worker with a
written copy of their results or by posting the results in an
appropriate location that is accessible to the workers. If exposures
exceed the PEL or STEL, employers must also notify the workers of the
corrective action they are taking to reduce worker exposures to or below
the PEL and STEL, and the schedule for completing of this action.

OSHA assumes that employers use posting to notify workers of their
exposure monitoring results. For purposes of calculating burden hour,
OSHA assumes that each exposure monitoring sample will be posted,
resulting in 59,383 postings (i.e., 2,092 new workers + 19,056 quarterly
samples + 28,694 semi-annual samples + 9,541 additional workers). The
Agency estimates that a clerical/secretary takes 5 minutes (.08 hour) to
prepare each worker’s results. Therefore, the annual total burden
hours and cost of this requirement are:

Burden hours:	 59,383 monitoring samples x .08 hour = 4,751 hours

              Cost:	 4,751 hours x $22.00 = $104,522

(B)  Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j)) 

Initial surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)(i))

OSHA estimates that 2,092 workers need initial surveillance annually,
and that each medical examination requires a worker (assumed to be a
service worker) to be away from work for 1 hour.  Accordingly, the
Agency determines the yearly burden hours and cost of this requirement
to be:

Burden hours:	 2,092 medical examinations x 1 hour = 2,092 hours

              Cost:	 2,092 hours x $23.87 = $49,936

Periodic medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(4)(ii))

Employers must update the medical and work history of each affected
worker every year. In doing so, the employer must provide periodic
physical examinations that include appropriate laboratory surveillance
if the worker is: 45 years of age or older and within 12 months of the
initial medical surveillance or any subsequent medial surveillance; or
younger than 45 years of age and is within 36 months of the initial
surveillance or any subsequent medical surveillance. OSHA estimates that
this requirement will result in 27,999 medical examinations per year,
and that a worker must be away from work for 1 hour to complete each
medical examination. Therefore, the total burden hours and cost
associated with this requirement each year are:

Burden hours:	27,999 medical examinations x 1 hour = 27,999 hours

              Cost:	27,999 hours x $23.87 = $668,336

Information provided to the physician or other licensed health-care
professional (§1910.1052(j)(8))

An employer must provide the PLHCP with specific information on each
worker who is medically examined. For initial surveillance OSHA assumes
that a secretary requires 15 minutes (.25 hour) to develop the specified
information and provide it to the PLHCP. Having already developed the
information for initial surveillance, it is not necessary to do so again
for periodic medical surveillance; therefore, secretaries need only
provide the relevant information to the PLHCP prior to periodic medical
surveillance, a task that the Agency believes will take 5 minutes (.08
hour).

Additionally, OSHA is taking under this paragraph the burden hours and
cost needed to provide the required information to PLHCPs who administer
the medical examinations associated with the MRP program (see the
following section). In this regard, the Agency finds that a secretary
spends 5 minutes (.08 hour) providing the PLHCP with this information
for each medical examination.

In summary, this ICR shows that 2,092 workers require initial
surveillance annually and 27,999 workers need periodic medical
surveillance each year, while the analysis in the following section
indicates that PLHCPs will administer 404 medical examinations yearly to
workers in the MRP program. Therefore, the total annual burden hours and
cost of this requirement are:

Burden hours:	(2,092 initial medical examinations x .25 hour) + (27,999
periodic medical examinations + 404 MRP medical examinations x .08 hour)
= 2,795 hours

 Cost:   2,795 hours x $22.00 = $61,490

Medical removal protection (MRP) (§1910.1052(j)(11))

Using percentages from the FEA, OSHA determined that each year 4,764
workers have MC exposures that exceed the PEL, 7.7% (367) of these
workers receive MRP (i.e., 5% for hepatic conditions and 2.7% for
dermatitis), and employers will administer 1 additional medical
examination to these MRP cases as specified by paragraph
(j)(11)(i)(B)(1) of the Standard. Moreover, in this ICR, the Agency is
assuming that 10% (37) of the 367 MRP cases receive a second additional
medical examination as required by this paragraph, for a total of 404
additional medical examinations administered under this provision.  The
Agency estimates that each medical examination requires the worker to be
away from work for 1 hour. Accordingly, this provision results in the
following burden hours and cost each year:

Burden hours:	 404 workers x 1 hour = 404 hours

 	  Cost:	 404 hours x $23.87 = $9,643 

(C) Employee information and training (§1910.1052(l))

In determining the burden hours and cost for conducting training, the
Agency estimates that there are 2,092 new workers requiring initial
monitoring. According to the RIA, employers take 10 minutes (.17 hour)
to provide initial training to workers. Employers must also retrain
workers as necessary. OSHA assumes that 10% of the total 88,885 (8,889)
workers are retrained annually, and that employers retrain workers in
sessions of 20, taking approximately 10 minutes (.17 hour). Thus, this
requirement results in the following annual burden hours and cost:

Burden hours:	(2,092 new workers x .17 hour) + (8,889/20 x .17 hour) =
432 hours

            Costs:	432 hours x $49.31 = $21,302

(D) Recordkeeping (§1910.1052(m))

Exposure measurements (§1910.1052(m)(2))

This provision requires employers to establish and maintain an accurate
record of measurements taken to monitor worker exposure to MC.  Using
information contained in an earlier section of this ICR (see “(A)
Exposure monitoring (§1910.1052(d)”), OSHA finds that each year
employers must establish and maintain an exposure monitoring record for
each worker on whom they conduct an initial determination.  The Agency
estimates that the 2,092 workers were initially monitored. For workers
who receive periodic or additional monitoring (i.e., 19,111 and 9,541
workers receiving periodic and additional testing, respectively) the
Agency assumes that each worker is individually monitored. The total
number of workers that will have exposure records as a result of an
initial determination or periodic/additional monitoring is 30,744. In
addition, OSHA estimates that it requires a clerical/secretary 5 minutes
(.08 hour) to establish and maintain, or to update, each of these
records. Therefore, the annual burden hours and cost associated with
this recordkeeping requirement are:

Burden hours:	30,744 monitoring records x .08 hour = 2,460 hours

  Cost:	2,460 hours x $22.00 = $54,120

Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(m)(3))

This provision requires employers to establish and maintain accurate
records containing specific information for each worker subject to
medical surveillance. Based on analyses performed above (see “(B)
Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j)(8)”), OSHA determined that each
year employers must establish and maintain records for the 2,092 workers
who receive initial surveillance, update records for 27,999 workers who
require periodic medical surveillance, and provide 404 medical
examinations for workers in the MRP program (for a total of 30,495
workers). The Agency estimates that a clerical/secretary takes 5 minutes
(.08 hour) to establish and maintain, or to update, a medical
surveillance record. Accordingly, the yearly burden hour and cost
estimates for this requirement are:

Burden hours:	30,495 workers x .08 hour = 2,440 hours

  Cost:	2,440 hours x $22.00 = $53,680

Availability (§1910.1052(m)(4)

The Agency determined these burden hours and cost as follows:

1.  Employee access

As noted previously in “(D), Recordkeeping (§ 1910.1052(m)” of this
ICR, OSHA determined that each year employers must establish and
maintain, or update, 30,744 exposure monitoring records and 30,495
medical surveillance records, for a total of 61,239 records.
Additionally, the Agency assumes that workers request access to 10% of
these records (i.e., 6,124 records).  OSHA estimates that a
clerical/secretary takes 5 minutes (.08 hour) to retrieve and refile
each requested record, resulting in the following annual burden hour and
cost estimates:

Burden hours:	6,124 records x .08 hours = 490 hours

              Cost:	490 hours x $22.00 = $10,780

2.  Federal access

The Standard specifies that employers must make required records
available to NIOSH and the Assistant Secretary (i.e., an OSHA compliance
officer) on request.  Based on the previous ICR, the Agency is assuming
that NIOSH will make no requests for any of these records; however, OSHA
estimates that it will make 1,268 requests for these records during
inspections.  In addition, the Agency finds that a professional will
spend about 5 minutes (.08 hour) informing an OSHA compliance officer of
the location of the requested records. Accordingly, the estimated yearly
burden hours and cost of this provision are:

Burden hours:	1,268 requests x .08 hours = 101 hours

              Cost:  101 hours x $49.31 = $4,980

The total annual burden hours required to make worker exposure
monitoring and medical surveillance records available to workers and
federal agencies for review is 591 hours (490 hours + 101 hours), while
the total yearly cost of this requirement is $15,760 ($10,780 + 4,980).



 

13.  Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents
or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.  (Do not
include the cost of any hour burden shown in Items 12 and 14.)

·  The cost estimate should be split into two components:  (a) a total
capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected useful
life) and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services
component.  The estimates should take into account costs associated with
generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the information. 
Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors
including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life on
capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which
costs will be incurred.  Capital and start-up costs include, among other
items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing
computers and software; monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing
equipment; and record storage facilities.

·  If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should
present ranges of cost burdens and explain the reasons for the variance.
 The cost of purchasing or contracting out information collections
services should be part of this cost burden estimate.  In developing
cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents
(fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment
process and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis
associated with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as
appropriate.

·  Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or
services, or portions thereof, made:  (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2)
to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with
the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide
information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of
customary and usual business or private practices.

Exposure monitoring (§1910.1052(d))

As noted previously in this ICR (“(A) Exposure monitoring
(§1910.1052(d)”), OSHA determined that each year employers must
conduct 59,383 worker monitorings using 5 passive dosimeters per worker.
The previous ICR assumed that each dosimeter cost $42. The Consumer
Price Index (CPI) indicated a 16% increase in the price of medical
commodities from 2005 to 2010; the cost of a dosimeter was assumed to
have increased by 16% as well. Therefore, the total annual cost of
providing exposure monitoring under the paperwork requirements of the
Standard is:

Cost:  59,383 worker monitorings x ($49 x 5 dosimeters) = $14,548,835 

Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j))

Under the section titled “(B) Medical surveillance (§1910.1052(j))”
in this ICR, OSHA found that each year employers administer medical
examinations to 2,092 workers who require initial surveillance, 27,999
workers who need periodic medical surveillance, and 404 workers in the
MRP program, for a total of 30,495 medical examinations. The previous
ICR assumed that each medical examination cost $130. The Consumer Price
Index (CPI) indicated a 17.9% increase in the price of professional
medical services from 2005 to 2010; the cost of a medical examination
was assumed to have increased by 17.9% as well. Thus, the cost of each
medical examination is assumed to be $153.  Accordingly, the total
yearly cost to employers of administering the medical examinations
associated with the paperwork requirements of the Standard is:

    Cost:  30,495 medical examinations x $153 = $4,665,735

The total cost to respondents for exposure monitoring ($14,548,835) and
medical surveillance ($4,665,735) is: $19,214,570.

14.  Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. 
Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which
should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as
equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense
that would not have been incurred without this collection of
information.  Agencies may also aggregate cost estimates from Items 12,
13, and 14 in a single table.

The Agency estimates that a compliance officer (GS-12, step 5), at an
hourly wage rate of $37.37 , spends about 5 minutes (.08 hour) during an
inspection reviewing the documents required by the Standard.  OSHA
determines that its compliance officers will conduct 1,268 such
inspections during each year covered by this ICR.  In making this cost
determination, the Agency does not account for other occupational costs
(e.g., equipment, overhead, and support staff expenses) because it
considers these costs to be normal expenses that would occur without the
collection of information requirements specified by the Standard. 
Therefore, the total yearly cost of these paperwork requirements to the
Federal government is:

Cost:  1,268 inspections x .08 hour x $37.37 = $3,791

15.  Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.

Using the U.S. Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) 2008, the Agency has updated the total number of
establishments, from 92,354 to 90,596 (a total decrease of 1.9% from
2005).   

Based on the decrease in the number of establishments, OSHA is
requesting an adjustment decrease in the burden hours of these paperwork
requirements from 67,361 hours to 63,560 hours, for a total decrease of
3,801 hours.  See Table 1 below.

In spite of a slight decrease in the number of medical exams, the
increased cost of medical exams (from $130 to $153) has resulted in an
increase of $624,555 in costs (from $4,041,180 to $4,665,735). 
Similarly, there is a cost increase in exposure monitoring of $1,836,905
(from $12,711,930 to $14,548,835), as a result of the increased costs of
dosimeters (from $42.00 to $49.00). 

16.  For collection of information whose results will be published,
outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any complex
analytical techniques that will be used.  Provide the time schedule for
the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the
collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and
other actions.

The Agency will not publish the information collected under this
standard.

17.  If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB
approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display
would be inappropriate.

There are no forms on which to display the expiration date. 

18.  Explain each exception to the certification statement.

The Agency is not seeking an exception to the certification statement in
item 19.

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS.

This Supporting Statement does not contain any collection of information
requirements that employ statistical methods.

Table 1 

Summary of Burden Hour Changes and Cost

Information Collection Requirement	Responses	Current Burden Hours
Requested Burden Hours	Burden Hour Change	Estimated Cost	Description of
Change

(A) Exposure monitoring







Initial determination	2,092	704	690	-14	$34,024	The decrease in burden
hours is a result of the decrease in covered workers.  Using the U.S.
Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
2008, the Agency has updated the total number of establishments, from
92,354 to 90,596 (a total decrease of 1.9% from 2005).  The Agency
estimates the percentage decrease in covered workers is the same as the
percentage decrease in covered establishments.

Periodic monitoring	47,750	16,063	15,758	-306	$776,978	See above.

Additional monitoring	9,541	3,210	3,149	-61	$155,277	See above.

Employee notification of monitoring status	59,383	4,843	4,751	-92
$104,522	See above.

 







(B) Medical surveillance







Initial surveillance	2,092	2,133	2,092	-41	$49,936	See above.

Periodic medical surveillance	27,999	28,542	27,999	-543	$668,336	See
above.

Information provided to the PLHCP	30,495	2,849	2,795	-54	$61,490	See
above.

Medical removal protection 	404	411	404	-7	$9,643	See above.

 







(C) Employee information and training







Employee information and training	2,536	440	432	-8	$21,302	See above.

 







(D) Recordkeeping







Exposure measurements	30,744	4,843	2,460	-2,383	$54,120	See above.

Medical surveillance	30,495	2,487	2,440	-47	$53,680	See above.

Availability	7,392	836	591	-245	$15,760	The burden hour decrease is a
result of the decrease in covered establishments and workers. Using the
U.S. Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) 2008, the Agency has updated the total number of establishments,
from 92,354 to 90,596 (a total decrease of 1.9% from 2005). The Agency
estimates the percentage decrease in covered workers is the same as the
percentage decrease in covered establishments.  

 







TOTALS	250,924	67,361	63,560	-3,801	$2,005,069

	 









  The purpose of this Supporting Statement is to analyze and describe
the burden hours and cost associated with provisions of the Methylene
Chloride Standard that contain paperwork requirements; it does not
provide information or guidance on how to comply with or to enforce the
standard.  The Methylene Chloride Standard for the Construction Industry
and Shipyard Employment Industry (29 CFR 1926.1052 and 29 CFR 1915.1052,
respectively) incorporate 29 CFR 1910.1052 by reference.

  The 8-hour TWA assesses an employee’s exposure relative to the
8-hour TWA permissible exposure limit (PEL), while the 15-minute
exposure measurement determines the employee’s exposure relative to
the short-term exposure limit (STEL).

  The Agency believes that the regulated areas provision does not result
in an information collection burden to employers because it is
performance oriented and does not require employers to post warning
signs.  Therefore, OSHA is not attributing any burden hours or cost to
this provision under PRA-95.

  This provision is similar to a requirements specified in paragraph
(e)(2) (“Multi-employer workplaces”) of OSHA’s Hazard
Communication (HC) Standard (§§ 1910.1200, 1915.1200, and 1926.59). 
Accordingly, the Agency is accounting for the burden hours and cost
resulting from this notification requirement under the Information
Collection Request (ICR) for the HC Standard, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Control Number 1218-0072.

  Paragraph (c) of §1910.134 requires employers to develop and
implement a written respiratory-protection program with
worksite-specific procedures, including program elements for respirator
use.

  

  The Agency believes that this requirement does not result in an
information collection burden to employers because the provision
requires PLHCPs, not employers, to provide the written opinion to
workers.  Therefore, OSHA is not attributing any burden hours or cost to
this provision under PRA-95.

  OSHA believes that PLHCPs seldom make such a recommendation and,
therefore, is not attributing any burden hours or cost to this
requirement.

 The Agency believes that this requirement does not result in an
information collection burden to employers because the provision
requires PLHCPs, not employers, to provide the written opinion to
workers.  Therefore, OSHA is not attributing any burden hours or cost to
this provision under PRA-95.

  Paragraph (j)(10) specifies that the physician or other licensed
health care professional shall presume, unless medical evidence
indicates to the contrary, that a medical condition is unlikely to
require medical removal from MC exposure if the employee is not exposed
to MC above the 8-hour TWA PEL.  If the physician or other licensed
health care professional recommends removal for an employee exposed
below the 8-hour TWA PEL, the  physician or other licensed health care
professional shall cite specific medical evidence, sufficient to rebut
the presumption that exposure below the 8-hour TWA PEL is unlikely to
require removal, to support the recommendation.  If such evidence is
cited by the physician or other licensed health care professional, then
the employer must remove the employee. 

  The Agency is accounting for the burden hours and cost resulting from
this notification requirement under the Information Collection Request
(ICR) for the HC Standard, OMB Control Number 1218-0072.

  Based on the Final Economic Analysis (FEA) of the final Standard, OSHA
is assuming that no establishments use objective data as a substitute
for exposure monitoring.  Accordingly, the Agency is not attributing any
burden hours or cost to this provision in this ICR.

  Using the U.S. Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) 2008, the Agency has updated the total number of
establishments, from 92,354 to 90,596 (a total decrease of 1.9% from
2005).  The number of covered  workers was determined by adjusting the
previous ICR estimates, taking into account the overall decrease in the
number of establishments, assuming that the number of exposed workers
per establishment has remained constant.  Thus, the number of new
covered workers is 2092 (2,133 x (1-.019).  

  One passive dosimeter is a control and is not placed on an employee;
therefore, no time is attributed for the control badge.

  Note that some employees may receive repeated exposure monitoring, so
the total employees monitored under this provision and under the
requirement for additional monitoring (see next section) are not
necessarily separate employees. 

  OSHA recognizes this is likely an over estimate, as not all new
employees who are monitored are likely to require a medical examination.

  OSHA assumes that requests for exposure measurement and medical
surveillance records by former employees, designated employee
representatives, and parties having the written consent of an employee
are minimal; therefore, it did not include these requests in this
determination.

  This determination includes NIOSH and OSHA access to the training
materials specified by paragraph (l) of the Standard. OSHA determined
the number of inspections by calculating an overall inspection rate of
1.4% (0.014) for all employers under its jurisdiction, then applying
this percentage to the number of establishments covered by the Standard
(90,596).

  Source: U.S. Office of Personnel Management, General Schedule and
Locality Tables, Salary Table 2011-RUS,
http://www.opm.gov/oca/11tables/html/RUS_h.asp.

  OSHA determined the number of inspections by calculating an overall
inspection rate of 1.4% (0.014) for all employers under its
jurisdiction, then applying this percentage to the number of
establishments covered by the Standard (90,596).

 PAGE   

 PAGE   - 19 - 

