E9-26579. Hazard Communication; Correction  

  • Start Preamble

    AGENCY:

    Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), DOL.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule: correction.

    SUMMARY:

    This document corrects the OSHA Hazard Communication standard proposed rule and request for comment, published in the Federal Register of September 30, 2009. This notice corrects eight errors, four in the preamble and Start Printed Page 57279four that appear in Appendix A: Table A.1.1, Table A.1.2, Table A.2.3, and Table A7.1.

    Start Further Info

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general information and press inquiries, contact 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. For technical information, contact Maureen Ruskin, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Room N-3718, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-1950.

    Correction

    1. In the preamble of OSHA's Hazard Communication standard, published in the Federal Register of September 30, 2009, (74 FR 50279) on page 50280, in the first column, correct the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to read as follows:

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information and press inquiries, contact 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. For technical information, contact Maureen Ruskin, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Room N-3718, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-1950.

    2. On page 50335, in column one, in the fifth full paragraph from the top of the page, in the third line from the bottom of that paragraph, the dollar amount of “$500 million” is corrected to read “$700 million”.

    3. On page 50372, in column two, in the second full paragraph under Item 4, in the fifth line from the bottom of that paragraph, the quantity “4,215,404” is corrected to read “3,877,457”.

    4. On page 50378, in column one, in the last line of text in that column above footnote 17, the dollar amount of “$610 million” is corrected to read “$621 million”.

    5. In Appendix A to § 1910.1200 on page 50445, correct Table A.1.1: Acute toxicity hazard categories and acute toxicity estimate (ATE) values defining the respective categories, to read as follows:

    Exposure routeCategory 1Category 2Category 3Category 4
    Oral (mg/kg bodyweight) See: Notes (a), (b)≤ 5> 5 and ≤ 50> 50 and ≤ 300> 300 and ≤ 2000.
    Dermal (mg/kg bodyweight) See: Notes (a), (b)≤ 50> 50 and ≤ 200> 200 and ≤ 1000> 1000 and ≤ 2000.
    Inhalation—Gases (ppmV) See: Note (a), Note (b), Note (c)≤ 100> 100 and ≤ 500> 500 and ≤ 2500> 2500 and ≤ 20000.
    Inhalation—Vapors (mg/l) See: Note (a), Note (b), Note (c), Note (d)≤ 0.5> 0.5 and ≤ 2.0> 2.0 and ≤ 10.0> 10.0 and ≤ 20.0.
    Inhalation—Dusts and Mists (mg/l) See: Note (a), Note (b), Note (c)≤ 0.05> 0.05 and ≤ 0.5> 0.5 and ≤ 1.0> 1.0 and ≤ 5.0.
    Note: Gases concentration are expressed in parts per million per volume (ppmV).
    Notes to Table A.1.1:
    (a) The acute toxicity estimate (ATE) for the classification of a substance is derived using the LD50/LC50 where available ;
    (b) The acute toxicity estimate (ATE) for the classification of a substance or ingredient in a mixture is derived using:
     (i) the LD50/LC50 where available. Otherwise,
     (ii) the appropriate conversion value from Table 1.2 that relates to the results of a range test, or
     (iii) the appropriate conversion value from Table 1.2 that relates to a classification category;
    (c) Inhalation cut-off values in the table are based on 4 hour testing exposures. Conversion of existing inhalation toxicity data which has been generated according to 1 hour exposure is achieved by dividing by a factor of 2 for gases and vapors and 4 for dusts and mists;
    (d) For some chemicals the test atmosphere may consist of a vapor which is near the gaseous phase. In these cases, classification is based on ppmV as follows: Category 1 (100 ppmV), Category 2 (500 ppmV), Category 3 (2500 ppmV), Category 4 (20000 ppmV).
    The terms “dust,” “mist,” and “vapor” are defined as follows:
    (i) Dust: solid particles of a substance or mixture suspended in a gas (usually air);
    (ii) Mist: liquid droplets of a substance or mixture suspended in a gas (usually air);
    (iii) Vapor: the gaseous form of a substance or mixture released from its liquid or solid state.

    6. In Appendix A on page 50447, correct Table A.1.2: Conversion from experimentally obtained acute toxicity range values (or acute toxicity hazard categories) to acute toxicity point estimates for use in the formulas for the classification of mixtures, to read as follows:

    Exposure routesClassification category or experimentally obtained acute toxicity range estimateConverted acute toxicity point estimate
    Oral (mg/kg bodyweight )0 < Category 1 ≤ 50.5
    5 < Category 2 ≤ 505
    50 < Category 3 ≤ 300100
    300 < Category 4 ≤ 2000500
    Dermal (mg/kg bodyweight)0 < Category 1 ≤ 505
    50 < Category 2 ≤ 20050
    200 < Category 3 ≤ 1000300
    1000 < Category 4 ≤ 20001100
    Gases (ppmV)0 < Category 1 ≤ 10010
    100 < Category 2 ≤ 500100
    500 < Category 3 ≤ 2500700
    2500 < Category 4 ≤ 200004500
    Vapors (mg/l)0 < Category 1 ≤ 0.50.05
    0.5 < Category 2 ≤ 2.00.5
    2.0 < Category 3 ≤ 10.03
    10.0 < Category 4 ≤ 20.011
    Dust/mist (mg/l)0 < Category 1 ≤ 0.50.005
    Start Printed Page 57280
    0.05 < Category 2 ≤ 2.00.05
    0.5 < Category 3 ≤ 10.00.5
    1.0 < Category 4 ≤ 20.01.5
    Note: Gases concentration are expressed in parts per million per volume (ppmV).

    7. In Appendix A on page 50450, correct Table A.2.3: Concentration of ingredients of a mixture classified as skin Category 1 or 2 that would trigger classification of the mixture as hazardous to skin (Category 1 or 2), to read as follows:

    Sum of ingredients classified as:Concentration triggering classification of a mixture as:
    Skin corrosive Category 1Skin irritant Category 2
    Skin Category 1≥ 5%≥ 1% but < 5%.
    Skin Category 2≥10%.
    (10 × Skin Category 1) + Skin Category 2≥10%.

    8. In Appendix A, on page 50467, correct Table A.7.1: Cut-off values/concentration limits of ingredients of a mixture classified as reproductive toxicants or for effects on or via lactation that trigger classification of the mixture, to read as follows:

    Ingredients classified as:Cut-off values/concentration limits triggering classification of a mixture as:
    Category 1 reproductive toxicantCategory 2 reproductive toxicantAdditional category for effects on or via lactation
    Category 1 reproductive toxicant≥ 0.1%
    Category 2 reproductive toxicant≥ 0.1%
    Additional category for effects on or via lactation≥ 0.1%

    Authority

    This document was prepared under the direction of Jordan Barab, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

    Start Signature

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of October 2009.

    Jordan Barab,

    Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

    End Signature End Further Info End Preamble

    [FR Doc. E9-26579 Filed 11-4-09; 8:45 am]

    BILLING CODE 4510-26-P

Document Information

Comments Received:
0 Comments
Published:
11/05/2009
Department:
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule: correction.
Document Number:
E9-26579
Pages:
57278-57280 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. OSHA-H022K-2006-0062 (formerly Docket No. H022K)
RINs:
1218-AC20: Hazard Communication
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/1218-AC20/hazard-communication
PDF File:
e9-26579.pdf
Supporting Documents:
» Kearney/Centaur. 1991a. The accuracy of material safety data sheets. Report prepared for OSHA under contract J-9-F-8-0019. The results of this study were later published as: Kolp, P.W., P.L. Williams, and R.C. Burtan. 1995. Assessment of the accuracy of m
» Eastern Research Group (ERG, 2012). Excel Spreadsheets in Support of OSHA Final Economic Analysis for GHS Rule. Submitted to Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Directorate of Evaluation and Analysis, Office of Regulatory Analysis, Contract N
» SBA Office of Advocacy, 2003, p. 18: How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act: A Guide for Government Agencies (May 2003).
» Green Chemistry: Cornerstone to a Sustainable California. A more recent study prepared by the University of California Centers for Occupational and Environmental Health, and commissioned by the California Environmental Protection Agency, suggests that fat
» [BLS] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009. Number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses involving days away from work by industry and selected sources of injury or illness, 2007.
» [BLS] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2008. Nonfatal occupational illnesses by major industry sector and category of illness, private industry, 2007.
» Eastern Research Group (ERG, 2011). Harmonization of Hazard Communication: Summary of Labeling Costs. Final Report. Submitted to Occupational Safety And Health Administration, Directorate of Evaluation and Analysis, Office of Regulatory Analysis, Cont
» Eastern Research Group (ERG, 2010). Harmonization of Hazard Communication: Labeling Costs. Final Report. Submitted to Occupational Safety And Health Administration, Directorate of Evaluation and Analysis, Office of Regulatory Analysis, Contract No. GS
» Work-Related Death: A Continuing Epidemic
» Kearney/Centaur. 1991b. The comprehensibility of material safety data sheets. Report prepared for OSHA under contract J-9-F-8-0019. The results of this study were later published as: Kolp, P., B. Sattler, M. Blayney, and T. Sherwood. 1993. Comprehensibili
CFR: (3)
29 CFR 1910
29 CFR 1915
29 CFR 1926