FR 2021-02697

The document in question is a Notice from the Department of Labor (DOL) inviting public commentary on an upcoming information collection related to the Steel Erection Standard under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The primary aim is to ensure that workers, especially those at risk of falls during steel erection work, receive proper training and verification that their equipment and materials are safe for use. This Information Collection Request (ICR) seeks approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as mandated by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

General Summary

The DOL is submitting this request to ensure compliance with safety standards and to improve the processes involved in maintaining them. Public comments are solicited to assess the viability, utility, and clarity of the proposed information collection. It emphasizes that federal entities cannot proceed with information collections without obtaining a valid OMB Control Number. The deadline for public comments is set for March 12, 2021. The document details the number of respondents and responses, as well as the estimated time burden associated with this process.

Significant Issues and Concerns

A notable issue identified within the document is the lack of clarity regarding the potential impact of public comments on the ultimate decision. Although feedback is requested, the document does not provide insight into how these comments will influence the decision-making process or outcomes. Additionally, there is a grammatical error present, which might detract from the professionalism of the document: the omission of "the" within the phrase "comments that agency receives".

The instructions for submitting comments also assume a level of familiarity with navigating the www.reginfo.gov website, potentially posing a challenge to those not well-versed with the system. Furthermore, the use of specific legal references, such as "44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D)" and "5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6," could be unclear to readers without additional context.

Public Impact

Broadly, the implications of this document for the public are rooted in workplace safety. Ensuring that workers receive proper training and that equipment safety is verified will likely reduce incidents of workplace injury, thereby maintaining a safer environment within the construction sector, particularly in steel erection activities. The effective implementation of these standards could benefit the public by reducing healthcare costs and minimizing the economic burden of workplace accidents.

Impact on Stakeholders

The private sector, particularly businesses engaged in steel erection, will directly experience the outcomes of this OMB approval. If successful, businesses might face administrative demands related to compliance with the updated information collection requirements. Nevertheless, this investment could result in a safer working environment and potentially fewer liabilities related to workplace accidents.

For workers within these industries, the document signals an emphasis on safety, promising better training and secure work conditions. This has the potential to positively affect worker morale and safety but could temporarily strain companies needing to align with new standards.

In conclusion, while this Notice aims to enhance workplace safety and compliance, its success greatly depends on comprehensive feedback from the public and the ability of stakeholders to adapt to any enacted changes effectively.

The document in question deals with an information collection request submitted by the Department of Labor (DOL), specifically through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). One financial reference is explicitly stated in the text, indicating "Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0". This suggests that, aside from the time commitments and compliance measures involved, there are no additional direct financial expenditures anticipated as part of this information collection effort.

The absence of other cost burdens implies that the activities required under this request do not involve purchasing new materials, equipment, or any other physical resources that would involve direct spending by the organizations required to comply. Instead, the focus appears to be on the administrative and procedural aspects of the information, which are covered under the category of time burden. The document states a total estimated annual time burden of 34,157 hours. This highlights that the primary investment from the affected businesses is time rather than money, translating into potential indirect costs related to staff hours or operational downtime.

In relation to the identified issues, it is notable that the document does not anticipate any wasteful spending, nor does it suggest favoritism towards any particular organization; the affected public is broadly defined to encompass the "Private Sector, Businesses or other for-profits." The estimate that this collection involves no other costs could be perceived as minimizing the financial burden on respondents, which is significant given the typical costs associated with regulatory compliance.

However, the document does fail to explain how these financial assumptions, such as the lack of cost burden, are derived or to what extent they factor in the commitment of time and resources already available to businesses. Furthermore, while public comments are invited on various aspects of the information collection, the document does not make clear how such feedback would potentially alter the financial expectations or be balanced against the anticipated time burden.

Overall, the reference to a zero-cost burden for other expenses is significant as it directly impacts the perceived economic feasibility of compliance for businesses involved in steel erection activities. Understanding this context is crucial for organizations evaluating their participation in this request, and more comprehensive transparency regarding the derivation of these estimates could provide greater clarity for stakeholders.