Proposed Rule2025-11626
Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards; Textiles; Sawmills; Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 1, 2025
Issuing agencies
Labor DepartmentOccupational Safety and Health Administration
Abstract
This proposed rule removes from the Code of Federal Regulations: OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR 1915.90.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28282-28286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-11626]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1915
[Docket No. OSHA-2025-0009]
RIN 1218-AD50
Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards; Textiles;
Sawmills; Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard
Employment
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule removes from the Code of Federal
Regulations: OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking
Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR 1915.90.
DATES: Comments and other information, including requests for a
hearing, must be received on or before September 2, 2025.
Informal public hearing: OSHA will schedule an informal public
hearing on the rule if requested during the comment period. If a
hearing is requested, the location and date of the hearing, procedures
for interested parties to notify the agency of their intention to
participate, and procedures for participants to submit their testimony
and documentary evidence will be announced in the Federal Register.
[[Page 28283]]
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit comments and attachments,
identified by Docket No. OSHA-2025-0009, electronically at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, which is the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow
the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency's name and
the docket number for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2025-0009). When
uploading multiple attachments to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, please
number all of your attachments because <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> will
not automatically number the attachments. This will be very useful in
identifying all attachments. For example, Attachment 1--title of your
document, Attachment 2--title of your document, Attachment 3--title of
your document. For assistance with commenting and uploading documents,
please see the Frequently Asked Questions on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
All comments, including any personal information you provide, are
placed in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Therefore, OSHA cautions
commenters about submitting information they do not want made available
to the public or submitting materials that contain personal information
(either about themselves or others), such as Social Security Numbers
and birthdates.
Docket: The docket for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2025-0009)
is available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, the Federal eRulemaking
Portal. Most exhibits are available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>;
some exhibits (e.g., copyrighted material) are not available to
download from that web page. However, all materials in the dockets are
available for inspection at the OSHA Docket Office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For press inquiries: Contact Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, Occupational Safety and Health Administration;
telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7e131b17121710191b0c50180c1f101d170d4c3e1a111250191108"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="224f474b4e4b4c4547500c4450434c414b511062464d4e0c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>.
General information and technical inquiries: Contact Andrew
Levinson, Director, OSHA Directorate of Standards and Guidance,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration; telephone: (202) 693-
1950; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#345b475c551a50475374505b581a535b42"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="afc0dcc7ce81cbdcc8efcbc0c381c8c0d9">[email protected]</span></a>.
Copies of this Federal Register notice: Electronic copies are
available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This Federal Register notice,
as well as news releases and other relevant information, also are
available at OSHA's web page at <a href="https://www.osha.gov">https://www.osha.gov</a>. A ``100-word
summary'' is also available on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Legal Authority and Preliminary Findings
III. Background
IV. Explanation of the Proposed Removal from the Code of Federal
Regulations: OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking
Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR 1915.90.
V. Preliminary Economic Analysis
VI. Additional Requirements
VII. Authority and Signature
VIII. Regulatory Text
I. Executive Summary
The intent of this proposed rule is to remove from the Code of
Federal Regulations: OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical
Hazards Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking
Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR 1915.90. The
hazards these standards are designed to address are sufficiently
addressed in other Federal, State, and local requirements.
II. Legal Authority and Preliminary Findings
The purpose of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C.
651 et seq.) (``the Act'' or ``the 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(b)). To achieve this goal Congress authorized the Secretary of
Labor (``the Secretary'') to promulgate standards to protect workers,
including the authority ``to set mandatory occupational safety and
health standards applicable to businesses affecting interstate
commerce'' (29 U.S.C. 651(b)(3); see also 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2) requiring
employers to comply with OSHA standards), 29 U.S.C. 655(a) (authorizing
summary adoption of existing consensus and established federal
standards within two years of the Act's enactment), 29 U.S.C. 655(b)
(authorizing promulgation, modification or revocation of standards
pursuant to notice and comment)), and 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(7) (authorizing
OSHA to include among a standard's requirements labeling, monitoring,
medical testing, and other information-transmittal provisions). An
occupational safety and health standard is ``. . . a standard which
requires conditions, or the adoption or use of one or more practices,
means, methods, operations, or processes, reasonably necessary or
appropriate to provide safe or healthful employment and places of
employment'' (29 U.S.C. 652(8)).
Before OSHA may promulgate a health or safety standard, it must
find that a standard is reasonably necessary or appropriate within the
meaning of section 652(8) of the OSH Act. Once OSHA makes a general
significant risk finding in support of a standard, the next question is
whether a particular requirement is reasonably related to the purpose
of the standard as a whole. See Asbestos Info. Ass'n/N. Am. v. Reich,
117 F.3d 891, 894 (5th Cir. 1997); Forging Indus. Ass'n v. Sec'y of
Labor, 773 F.2d 1436, 1447 (4th Cir. 1985); United Steelworkers of Am.,
AFL-CIO-CLC v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189, 1237-38 (D.C. Cir. 1980)
(``Lead I'').
A standard is technologically feasible if the protective measures
it requires already exist, can be brought into existence with available
technology, or can be created with technology that is reasonably
expected to be developed (see Am. Iron and Steel Inst. v. OSHA, 939
F.2d 975, 980 (D.C. Cir. 1991)). Courts have also interpreted
technological feasibility to mean that a typical firm in each affected
industry or application group will reasonably be able to implement the
requirements of the standard in most operations most of the time (see,
e.g., Public Citizen v. OSHA, 557 F.3d 165, 170-71 (3d Cir. 2009)
(citing Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272)).
Because this proposed rule would remove existing OSHA requirements
from the CFR, OSHA anticipates employers would have no technological
issues complying with the rule. Accordingly, the agency preliminarily
finds that the proposed rule is technologically feasible for affected
employers.
In determining economic feasibility, OSHA must consider the cost of
compliance in an industry rather than on individual employers. In its
economic analyses, OSHA ``must construct a reasonable estimate of
compliance costs and demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that these
costs will not threaten the existence or competitive structure of an
industry, even if it does portend disaster for some marginal firms''
(Am. Iron and Steel
[[Page 28284]]
Inst., 939 F.2d at 980, quoting Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272). OSHA has
preliminarily determined that this proposed rule is economically
feasible because this action is deregulatory and imposes no additional
costs. OSHA's economic analysis of the cost savings are presented in
Section V.
The Administrative Procedures Act directs agencies to include in
each rule adopted ``a concise general statement of [the rule's] basis
and purpose'' (5 U.S.C. 553(c)); cf. 29 U.S.C. 655(e) (requiring the
Secretary to publish a ``statement of reasons'' for any standard
promulgated)). This notice satisfies this concise statement
requirement.
III. Background
OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards Standard, 29
CFR 1910.144, requires that red be the basic color for the
identification of danger (e.g., safety cans of certain portable
containers, red lights at barricades, danger signs) and stop (e.g.,
emergency stop bars on hazardous machines and stop buttons on certain
electrical switches). The standard also requires that yellow be the
basic color for designating caution and for marking physical hazards
such as striking against, stumbling, falling, tripping, and caught-in-
between.
Paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262
(which applies to the design, installation, processes, operation, and
maintenance of textile machinery, equipment, and other plant facilities
in all plants engaged in the manufacture and processing of textiles,
except those processes used exclusively in the manufacture of synthetic
fibers), requires that identification of physical hazards be in
accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.144. Similarly,
paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265 (which
applies to sawmill operations including, but not limited to, log and
lumber handling, sawing, trimming, and planing; waste disposal;
operation of dry kilns; finishing; shipping; storage; yard and yard
equipment; and for power tools and affiliated equipment used in
connection with such operations, but excluding the manufacture of
plywood, cooperage, and veneer), requires that physical hazard marking
be as specified in 29 CFR 1910.144. Finally, OSHA's Safety Color Code
for Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR
1915.90 (which generally applies to ship repairing, shipbuilding, and
shipbreaking employments and related employments), provides that the
requirements applicable to shipyard employment under 29 CFR 1915.90 are
identical to the requirements set forth at 29 CFR 1910.144.
IV. Explanation of the Proposed Removal from the Code of Federal
Regulations: OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of OSHA's Textiles
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's Sawmills
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for Marking
Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR 1915.90.
In OSHA's preliminary judgment, OSHA's Safety Color Code for
Marking Physical Hazards Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144, paragraph (c)(8) of
OSHA's Textiles Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262, paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's
Sawmills Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265, and OSHA's Safety Color Code for
Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR
1915.90, are designed to address hazards that are sufficiently
addressed by other Federal, State, and local requirements. First, it is
OSHA's understanding that the hazards these standards are designed to
address are also addressed by state and local building and fire codes.
Second, the hazards these standards are designed to address are also
addressed by OSHA's Specifications for Accident Prevention Signs and
Tags Standard, 29 CFR 1910.145, which addresses the design,
application, and use of signs or symbols intended to indicate and,
insofar as possible, to define specific hazards of a nature such that
failure to designate them may lead to accidental injury to workers or
the public, or both, or to property damage. Moreover, requiring the
identification of hazards by color alone may be ineffective for those
individuals with color vision deficiency (i.e., color blindness).
Finally, OSHA has cited these standards only about 4 times a year (on
average) since 2012. For comparison, OSHA issues approximately 7,000
citations a year for fall protection violations. Therefore, OSHA is
proposing to remove these standards from the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Questions: OSHA seeks comment regarding whether the hazards these
standards are designed to address are sufficiently addressed by other
Federal, State, and local requirements; whether these standards are
necessary to protect employees from occupational safety and health
hazards; and whether removal of these standards from the CFR would
compromise worker safety.
V. Preliminary Economic Analysis
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1532(a)) require that OSHA estimate the benefits, costs, and net
benefits of regulations, and analyze the impacts of certain rules that
OSHA promulgates. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules,
and promoting flexibility.
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or UMRA, or a ``major rule'' under the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Neither the benefits
nor the costs of this proposed rule would exceed $100 million in any
given year. Furthermore, as discussed below in Review Under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, because the proposed rule would not impose
any costs, OSHA certifies that it would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
OSHA estimates that there are currently 7,452,757 establishments in
general industry and shipyards affected by OSHA standards addressing
safety color coding (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024) (See OSHA, 2025, for a
list of affected industries). The proposed rescission of the standards
addressing safety color coding will, among other things, eliminate the
time necessary for new establishments and newly hired occupational
health and safety specialists at existing establishments to familiarize
themselves with the requirements of OSHA's Safety Color Code for
Marking Physical Hazards Standard, 29 CFR 1910.144; paragraph (c)(8) of
OSHA's Textiles Standard, 29 CFR 1910.262; paragraph (c)(11) of OSHA's
Sawmills Standard, 29 CFR 1910.265; and OSHA's Safety Color Code for
Marking Physical Hazards for Shipyard Employment Standard, 29 CFR
1915.90. Based on an average annual establishment entry rate of 10
percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2025), an average hire rate of 43.9
percent (BLS, 2025) and 20 minutes less time spent on regulatory
familiarization at a loaded hourly wage rate for an occupational health
and safety specialist of $65.41, OSHA estimates that this deregulatory
action would mean about $87.6 million in cost savings annually.
OSHA also estimated the impacts under an alternative scenario where
only new entrants into the industry would be affected by the rescission
of the safety color warning standards in general industry and
shipyards. This scenario assumes that for non-entrant
[[Page 28285]]
(i.e., existing) establishments within an industry, the familiarization
time saved for newly hired occupational health and safety specialists
is negligible due to knowledge of the requirements in the safety color
warning standards retained institutionally within the business entity
by team leaders and other senior production staff. For this scenario,
costs savings that result from rescinding the standards in general
industry and shipyards addressing safety color warnings would be $16.2
million.
A third impacts scenario, one that is likely closer to the real-
world environment for retention and communication of safety and health
information in most workplaces, would be the midpoint of the two
extreme cases described above. Under this mid-range scenario,
approximately half of affected establishments would retain staff whose
complete knowledge of the rescinded standards would substitute for the
familiarization time needed by the newly hired health and safety
specialists. Viewed alternatively, under this mid-range scenario, all
affected establishments retain veteran staff who can briefly inform the
new safety and health specialist of the status of standards such as
those found in the safety color warnings in less time (roughly ten
minutes) than would be necessary in the absence of institutional
knowledge (twenty minutes). OSHA estimates that this would result in
cost savings of $51.9 million annually.
OSHA's estimate of cost savings may underestimate total cost
savings if the elimination of the labor burden for regulatory
familiarization extends to the avoidance of unnecessary safety training
of employees.
OSHA requests public comment on this preliminary analysis of the
cost savings for employers affected by the rescission of the standards
addressing safety color coding. Specifically, OSHA seeks comments and
data on the following questions:
1. How much do employers expect to save as a consequence of the
rescission of requirements in the current standard?
2. How much familiarization time would employers who are new
entrants to the market expect to save based on the revisions?
3. Are there any benefits for worker protection that can be
anticipated from this proposed change?
4. Are there any costs for employers that would result from this
change that OSHA has not considered?
Sources
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (BLS, 2025). Occupational
Employment and Wage Statistics--May 2024 (Released April 2, 2025).
Available at <a href="https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm">https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm</a> (Accessed April 11,
2025)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (OSHA, 2025). Color
Coding Deregulatory Model: Excel workbook, supporting profile and
cost data. June 6, 2025.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2024). County Business Patterns 2022 (Released
June 27, 2024). Available at <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cbp.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cbp.html</a> (Accessed July 17, 2024)
U.S. Census Bureau. (2025). Business Dynamics Statistics. Available
at <a href="https://bds.explorer.ces.census.gov/?xaxis-id=year&xaxis-selected=2018,2019,2020,2021,2022&group-id=none&measure-id=estabs_entry_rate&chart-type=bar">https://bds.explorer.ces.census.gov/?xaxis-id=year&xaxis-selected=2018,2019,2020,2021,2022&group-id=none&measure-id=estabs_entry_rate&chart-type=bar</a> (Accessed June 6, 2025)
Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a
final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any rule that by law
must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that
the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
OSHA reviewed this proposed rescission under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. This rule eliminates a burdensome
regulation. Therefore, OSHA preliminarily concludes that the rescission
would not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not
warranted. OSHA will transmit this certification and supporting
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). OSHA
requests comment on this regulatory flexibility certification.
VI. Additional Requirements
A. Requirements for States With OSHA-Approved State Plans
Under section 18 of the OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.), Congress
expressly provides that States may adopt, with Federal approval, a plan
for the development and enforcement of occupational safety and health
standards that are ``at least as effective'' as the Federal standards
in providing safe and healthful employment and places of employment (29
U.S.C. 667). OSHA refers to these OSHA-approved, State-administered
occupational safety and health programs as ``State Plans.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Of the 29 States and U.S. territories with OSHA-approved
State Plans, 22 cover public and private-sector employees: Alaska,
Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland,
Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon,
Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, and Wyoming. The remaining six States and one U.S.
territory cover only State and local government employees:
Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York,
and the Virgin Islands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Federal OSHA promulgates a new standard or a more stringent
amendment to an existing standard, State Plans must either amend their
standards to be identical to, or ``at least as effective as,'' the new
Federal standard or amendment, or show that an existing State Plan
standard covering this issue is ``at least as effective'' as the new
Federal standard or amendment (29 CFR 1953.5(a)). However, when OSHA
promulgates a new standard or amendment that does not impose additional
or more stringent requirements than an existing standard, State Plans
do not have to amend their standards, although they may opt to do so.
OSHA has preliminarily determined this proposed rule does not impose
additional or more stringent requirements than the existing standard,
and therefore State Plans are not required to amend their standards.
OSHA seeks comment on this assessment of its proposal.
B. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
defines ``collection of information'' to mean ``the obtaining, causing
to be obtained, soliciting, or requiring the disclosure to third
parties or the public, of facts or opinions by or for an agency,
regardless of form or format'' (44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)). Under the PRA, a
Federal agency cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information
unless it is approved by OMB under the PRA and the agency displays a
currently valid OMB control number (44 U.S.C. 3507). Also,
notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall be subject
to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if
the collection of information does not display a currently valid OMB
control number (44 U.S.C. 3512(a)(1)). The process for OMB approval is
found in 5 CFR part 1320. This proposed rule would impose no new
information collection requirements and does not affect the currently
approved information collections in General Working Conditions in
Shipyard Employment (29 CFR 1915 Subpt. F). Accordingly, OMB approval
is not required for this proposed rule.
[[Page 28286]]
C. Review Under Executive Order 12866
E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (Oct.
4, 1993), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to (1)
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits; (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices
can be made by the public.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review. OIRA has determined that this
proposed rule would not constitute a ``significant regulatory action''
under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this proposed rule was
not submitted to OIRA for review under E.O. 12866.
D. Environmental Impacts/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
OSHA has reviewed this proposed rule according to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as
amended by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 118-5, 321,
137 Stat. 10), and the Department of Labor's NEPA procedures (29 CFR
part 11). OSHA has preliminarily determined that this proposed rule
will have no impact on the quality of the human environment.
E. Other Statutory and Executive Order Considerations
OSHA has considered its obligations under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) and the Executive Orders on
Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments (E.O.
13175, 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000)), Federalism (E.O. 13132, 64 FR 43255
(Aug. 10, 1999)), and Protection of Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (E.O. 13045, 62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23, 1997)). Given
that this is a proposed deregulatory action that involves the removal
of requirements, that OSHA does not foresee economic impacts of $100
million or more, and that the action does not constitute a policy that
has federalism or tribal implications, OSHA has determined that no
further agency action or analysis is required to comply with these
statutes and executive orders. Furthermore, OSHA has determined that
this proposed rule is consistent with the policies and directives
outlined in E.O. 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation''
and is an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action.
List of Subjects
29 CFR Part 1910
Health, Occupational safety and health, Safety, Signs and symbols.
29 CFR Part 1915
Health, Longshore and harbor workers, Occupational safety and
health, Vessels.
VII. Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under the direction of Amanda Laihow,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
It is issued under the authority of sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, and
657); section 41 of the Longshore and Harbor Worker's Compensation Act
(33 U.S.C. 941); 5 U.S.C. 553; Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020
(85 FR 58383); and 29 CFR part 1911.
Dated: June 20, 2025.
Amanda Laihow,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
VIII. Regulatory Text
Proposed Amendments
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, OSHA is amending 29 CFR
parts 1910 and 1915 as follows:
PART 1910--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS
Subpart J--General Environmental Controls
0
1. The authority for 29 CFR 1910 subpart J is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of Labor's Order
No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90
(55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), 5-2007 (72 FR
31159), 4-2010 (75 FR 55355), 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8-2020 (85 FR
58393), as applicable.
Sections 1910.141, 1910.142, 1910.145, 1910.146, and 1910.147
also issued under 29 CFR part 1911.
Sec. 1910.144 [Reserved]
0
2. Remove and reserve Sec. 1910.144.
* * * * *
Subpart R--Special Industries
0
3. The authority for 29 CFR 1910 subpart R is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of Labor's Order
No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90
(55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 5-2007 (72 FR 31159), 4-2010 (75 FR
55355), 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8-2020 (85 FR 58393), as applicable;
and 29 CFR part 1911.
Sec. 1910.262(c)(8) [Reserved]
0
4. Remove and reserve paragraph (c)(8) of Sec. 1910.262.
Sec. 1910.265(c)(11) [Reserved]
0
5. Remove and reserve paragraph (c)(11) of Sec. 1910.265.
* * * * *
PART 1915--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR SHIPYARD
EMPLOYMENT
0
6. The authority for 29 CFR part 1915 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 941; 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657; Secretary of
Labor's Order No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48
FR 35736), 1-90 (55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 3-2000 (65 FR
50017), 5-2002 (67 FR 65008), 5-2007 (72 FR 31160), 4-2010 (75 FR
55355), 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), or 8-2020 (85 FR 58393); 29 CFR part
1911; and 5 U.S.C. 553, as applicable.
Subpart F--General Working Conditions
Sec. 1915.90 [Reserved]
0
7. Remove and reserve Sec. 1915.90.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-11626 Filed 6-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.