SS_Confined Spaces Const. (29 CFR Part 1926. Subpart AA)

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
FOR THE INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE PROPOSED STANDARD ON CONFINED SPACES IN CONSTRUCTION
(29 CFR PART 1926, SUBPART AA) 1
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB) CONTROL NUMBER 1218-0NEW
(June 2007)
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 Act of 1970 (i.e., “the 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 Act authorizes “the development and promulgation of occupational safety and
health standards” (29 U.S.C. 651).
Section 6(b)(7) of the Act specifies that “[a]ny standard promulgated under this subsection shall
prescribe the use of labels or other appropriate forms of warning as are necessary to insure that
employees are apprised of all hazards to which they are exposed, relevant symptoms and
appropriate emergency treatment, and proper conditions and precautions of safe use or
exposure.” This provision goes on to state that “[t]he Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, may by rule promulgated pursuant to section 553 of
title 5, United States Code, make appropriate modifications in the foregoing requirements
relating to the use of labels or other forms of warning . . . as may be warranted by experience,
information, or medical or technological developments acquired subsequent to the promulgation
of the relevant standard” (29 U.S.C. 655).
With regard to recordkeeping, the Act specifies that “[e]ach employer shall make, keep and
preserve, and make available to the Secretary . . . such records . . . as the Secretary . . . may
prescribe by regulation as necessary or appropriate for the enforcement of this Act . . . .” (29
U.S.C. 657). The 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. 657).
Under the authority granted by the Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (i.e.,
“OSHA” or “the Agency”) is proposing to publish at 29 CFR part 1926, subpart AA, a safety
standard for the construction industry that regulates confined spaces (i.e., “the proposed

1

The purpose of this Supporting Statement is to analyze and describe the burden hours and costs associated
with provisions of the proposed Standard that contain paperwork requirements; this Supporting Statement does not
provide information or guidance on how to comply with, or how to enforce, these provisions.

Standard"). Items 2 and 12 below describe in detail 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.

The proposed Standard specifies a number of collection of information requirements. Employers
and employees would use these collections of information whenever they identify a confined
space at a construction worksite. The following sections describe who would use the
information collected under each requirement, as well as how they would use it. The purpose of
the information would permit employers and employees to systematically evaluate the dangers in
confined spaces before entry is attempted, and to ensure that adequate measures have been
implemented to make the spaces safe for entry. In addition, the paperwork provisions of the
proposed Standard specify requirements for developing and maintaining a number of records and
other documents. Further, OSHA compliance safety and health officers would need the
information to determine, during an inspection, whether employers are complying with the
requirements. The following discussion identifies the sections of the proposed Standard that
have collection of information requirements, and describes the content and purpose of these
requirements in detail.
29 CFR 1926.1204 -- Initial Worksite Evaluation, Information Exchange, and Coordination
Paragraph (a) of this proposed section requires that controlling contractors or host employers provide their
contractors, for the contractors’ evaluation, with information about each confined space at the worksite
known to the controlling contractor and host employer; they would have to provide this information prior to
the contractor entering the confined space. For each of these spaces, the controlling contractor or host
employer would have to provide to the contractor with information about the location of the confined
space, the identity of any known hazards that affect the space, the classification of the space if previously
classified, and any precautions and procedures that the controlling contractor or host employer previously
implemented for entering the space. However, this provision expressly states that the controlling employer
and host employer would not have to provide this information if it is not already known to them; i.e., they
do not have to collect or search for the information. The purpose of this provision is to provide
available information to the contractor that would help the contractor accurately assess the
hazards that may be present in the confined space. 2
Under paragraph (c) of the proposal, when the contractor classifies a confined space, the contractor
must inform the controlling contractor and host employer of the precautions and procedures the contractor
will follow for entry into the space, and, at the conclusion of entry operations, inform the controlling
employer and host employer about any hazards that were present or developed during entry operations.
The Agency believes that this proposed paragraph would provide the controlling employer or
2

OSHA considers this proposed requirement to be usual and customary communications among controlling
contractors, host employers, and contractors; therefore, it does not impose burden hours or costs on the employers.
In this regard, information about hazards, classifications, and safety procedures pertaining to confined spaces would
be conveyed to contractors during initial discussions of the work to be performed in the confined space as a matter of
usual and customary business practice.
−2−

host employer with information they could transmit to other employers whom they may contract
later to perform work in the space, thereby assisting these employers in protecting their
employees in conducting safe entry operations.
29 CFR 1926.1205 -- Atmospheric Testing and Monitoring
This proposed section specifies the requirements for testing or monitoring atmospheric hazards in a
confined space. Proposed paragraph (b)(1) states that employers must provide or communicate any
information that the employer is required to retain regarding an atmosphere that is immediately dangerous
to life or health (IDLH) (e.g., the name of, and level of exposure to, the atmospheric contaminants; Material
Safety Data Sheets) to a medical facility that treats an employee exposed in a confined space to an
atmosphere that is IDLH. Such information would significantly assist the medical facility into
correctly diagnosing and treating the employee, thereby minimizing harm to the employee
caused by exposure to atmospheric hazards present in a confined space. 3
29 CFR 1926.1209 -- PRCS―Initial Tasks
This proposed section requires employers to comply with a number of paperwork requirements. Proposed
paragraph (a)(1) requires contractors to notify their employees that it anticipates will be in or near a permitrequired confined space (PRCS) and their authorized representative, and the controlling contractor about
the location of, and the hazards/dangers posed by, the PRCSs located at the job site. This proposed
requirement would inform the parties most affected by PRCS operations of the locations and
hazards of the PRCSs, thereby enabling them to take appropriate protective measures. 4
Proposed paragraph (a)(2) specifies that the contractor must post danger signs to warn employees about the
PRCSs. The contractor would post the signs at or near the entrances to the PRCSs, and the signs must use
the following or similar language: "Danger—Permit Required Confined Space—Authorized Employees
Only” or “Danger—Do Not Enter Without a Permit.” In addition, when contractors can demonstrate that
posting a sign is infeasible, they must use an equally effective means of warning employees. This
provision would augment the previous provision by providing employees in the vicinity of a
PRCS with a continuous warning regarding the presence and dangers of the PRCS. The signs
would deter employees not authorized to enter a PRCS from doing so, thereby preventing serious
harm to these employees. 5
3

The Agency is taking the burden for collecting information on IDLH exposures and arranging for its
transmission to a treating medical facility in the determinations described for paragraph (b)(1) of this proposed
section under section (B) of Item 12 below. However, OSHA is determining the burden for retaining this
atmospheric information under section (S) of Item 12 below, which describes the recordkeeping requirements of
proposed 29 CFR 1926.1219(e).
4
OSHA considers this proposed requirement to be usual and customary communications among contractors,
their employees, and controlling contractors; therefore, it does not impose burden hours or costs on the employers.
In this regard, information about locations and hazards of PRCSs at the job site would be conveyed to employees
and controlling contractors during discussions of work to be performed as a matter of usual and customary business
practice.
5
OSHA is taking only limited burden for this proposed requirement because the Agency is providing the
exact language that a contractor would use for the warning signs; accordingly, this provision is exempt under the
implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95, except in those cases in which employers provide similar language
−3−

Paragraphs (b) and (c) are subsets of paragraph (a) of this proposed section. These proposed paragraphs
specify notification requirements (e.g., erecting barriers, posting danger signs, and directly informing
employees and the controlling contractor) when the contractor prohibits any entry into a PRCS (proposed
paragraph (b)), or when the contractor limits entry to one or more employees (proposed paragraph (c)).
Proposed paragraph (b) would provide employees with information necessary for them to avoid entering
PRCSs and exposing themselves to the hazards therein, while proposed paragraph (c) would accomplish
the same purpose for employees not authorized to enter the PRCS.6
Proposed paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) require that employers ensure that the employees who will be in or
near a PRCS have the knowledge and skills necessary to safely perform of their duties, including:
• An understanding of the hazards in the PRCS;
• The methods used to isolate, control, or otherwise protect the employees from these hazards; and,
• For those employees who will be in or near the PRCS but not authorized to perform entry
rescues, an understanding of the dangers of attempting such rescues.
The three proposed provisions in paragraph (d)(3) specify the frequency of training required by proposed
paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2). First, employers must ensure that employees acquire the requisite knowledge
and skills prior to initially entering a PRCS. Second, if employees in or near a PRCS subsequently receive
new PRCS-related duties to perform, the employer must provide those employees with the requisite
training prior to the employees reentering the PRCS to perform these duties. The last provision of proposed
paragraph (d)(3) specifies that if the employer finds a new hazard in the PRCS for which an employee in or
near the PRCS has received no previous training, the employer must ensure that the authorized entrant exits
the PRCS and receives the necessary training regarding the new hazard before resuming work in the PRCS.
The Agency believes that the proposed requirements specified by proposed paragraph (d)(1)
would ensure that employees in or near a PRCS would be able to perform their work effectively and safely
having acquired a thorough knowledge of the hazards in a PRCS and of the methods used to isolate and
control these hazards. Accordingly, these employees would recognize when these methods have failed,
and would be able to respond appropriately to such failures. Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would prevent
unqualified employees located outside the PRCS from trying to rescue an injured employee
inside the PRCS, thereby endangering themselves and perhaps the injured employee. The three
proposed provisions of paragraph (d)(3) would ensure that employees have the requisite knowledge and
skills to respond promptly and appropriately to hazards before they begin PRCS operations, as well as
during PRCS operations if they must perform new duties or encounter new hazards.7
for their signs. (See section (C) of Item 12 below for additional information.)
6
Proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (c)(2) require that danger signs prohibiting or limiting entry must comply
with the specifications of proposed paragraph (a)(2). Therefore, OSHA is taking the burden for these requirements
under the determinations made for proposed paragraph (a)(2) (see the previous discussion for proposed paragraph
(a)(2), as well as footnote 5 above).
7
The Agency concludes that these proposed requirements are written in performance-oriented language and,
thus, are not considered collections of information under the implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95.
−4−

Under proposed paragraph (d)(4), employers must ensure that employees can demonstrate proficiency in
the duties required by this proposed section. Accordingly, employers would have to determine the
effectiveness of the training required by this proposed section. In doing so, employers must
ensure that employees have an understanding of, and can apply proficiently and appropriately,
the knowledge and skills required to work safely while exposed to the initial and subsequent
hazards present in the PRCS.
Proposed paragraph (d)(5) specifies that employers are to maintain records showing that employees
accomplished the requisite training. These records must contain the employee's name, names of the
trainers, and dates of the training. The Agency believes that maintaining such records is necessary
to ensure that employees who require training in PRCS hazards receive that training. OSHA
recognizes that the turnover rate for employees on construction sites is higher than in many other
industries. However, it believes that without this documentation it is unlikely that employers
would be able to keep track of employee training (especially in light of high turnover rates),
thereby allowing exposure of unqualified employees to PRCS hazards.
When an employee deviates from the PRCS entry procedures specified by the proposed Standard, or
demonstrates inadequate knowledge and skills of these procedures, proposed paragraph (d)(6) specifies that
the employer must retrain the employee in the required knowledge and skills before the employee
continues PRCS entry operations. By retraining employees who deviate from entry procedures, or
who demonstrate inadequate knowledge of these procedures, the employer would improve the
safety of all employees in a PRCS. OSHA believes that an employee can affect the safety of
others in a PRCS adversely when that employee deviates from, or has inadequate knowledge of,
correct entry procedures. 8
Under proposed paragraph (f), employers must develop procedures for safely terminating PRCS
entry operations for both planned and emergency conditions. This proposed provision would
ensure that, under planned conditions, the isolation and control methods used to prevent
employee exposure to PRCS hazards remain in effect until authorized employees have exited the
PRCS safely. Under emergency conditions, this proposed paragraph would permit authorized
employees to escape without harm from the PRCS, or, if they are injured, to be removed from
the PRCS without further injury.
29 CFR 1926.1210 -- PRCS―Preparing for Entry
Paragraph (a) of this proposed section specifies that, before employees enter a PRCS, the employer would
have to prepare and post an entry permit at the point where employees enter the PRCS. Paragraph (a) of
proposed 29 CFR 1926.1214 specifies the information that the employer must include on the
entry permit. This provision ensures that employees are aware of conditions necessary for safe
PRCS entry operations, including: the identification of the PRCS; the purpose for entering the
PRCS; the date and duration of the entry operation; the identification of physical and
8

See footnote 7 above. Also, note that this proposed provision does not require the maintenance or retention
of records.
−5−

atmospheric hazards in the PRCS; the means used to protect employees from, or to test and
monitor, the hazards; atmospheric-testing and –monitoring results; safe hazard levels; the other
employees involved in the entry operation; communication methods; the identity of, and methods
used to summon, the rescue service; equipment needed for the entry operations; additional
permits issued for work performed in the PRCS; and other appropriate information, including
problems encountered. 9
Both the complexity of safe PRCS entry operations and criticality of each step in the operation
make it necessary for employers to have written documentation regarding completion of each of
these steps before they are able to implement PRCS entry operations safely. Therefore, this
information would assist employers in determining that all required safety steps have been taken
before they allow entry into a PRCS. In addition, this information would allow employees
involved in entry operations, as well as their employers, to detect conditions that deviate from
the planned conditions specified in the entry permit, and to take whatever action is necessary to
assure protection, including summoning the rescue service.
Paragraph (e)(2)(v) of this proposed section requires that employers ensure that the entry
supervisor signs the entry permit after verifying the details described in the permit. OSHA
believes that having this information on the entry permit readily and conveniently identifies the
employees who have the authority and responsibility to maintain safe conditions during PRCS
operations to those employees most in need of this information (i.e., authorized employees,
attendants, other employees near the PRCS). Accordingly, this information would enable an
employee who discovers an unsafe condition in or near the PRCS, or who experiences or
observes symptoms of an unsafe condition, to notify the entry supervisor of these events so that
the supervisor can correct the hazard or evacuate the PRCS. In addition, this requirement
underscores to the employer and the entry supervisor the need to ensure that the safe-entry
conditions listed in the permit have been met.
29 CFR 1926.1211 -- PRCS―During Entry
Proposed paragraph (c) requires that employers document on the entry permit the determinations made to
assess whether the physical and atmospheric hazards in the PRCS remain isolated or controlled, or that the
employees remain protected from them. In addition, employers would have to document on the entry
permit atmospheric monitoring results obtained during entry operations. This information would provide
entry supervisors, authorized entrants, and attendants with evidence of the completed assessment,
while the assessment results would allow them to confirm that safe conditions exist in the PRCS.
If the assessment results indicate that conditions in or near the PRCS are deviating from the preentry conditions listed on the entry permit, they can take appropriate action to avoid exposure to
the PRCS hazards.
Under proposed paragraph (e)(3), the employer must ensure that the replacement entry supervisor signs the
entry permit. The purpose of this proposed requirement is to distinguish the current entry
9

Note that paragraph (k) of this proposed section reiterates the requirement to enter this information on the
entry permit.
−6−

supervisor responsible for the PRCS from the entry supervisor who previously had this
responsibility. Accordingly, an employee who discovers an unsafe condition in or near the
PRCS, or who experiences or observes symptoms of an unsafe condition, would be able to notify
the correct entry supervisor of these events, thereby avoiding delays in controlling the hazard or
evacuating the PRCS. In addition, this requirement underscores to the replacement entry
supervisor the need to ensure that the safe-entry conditions listed in the permit have been met.
Paragraph (f) of this proposed section has several provisions that contain paperwork
requirements. Proposed paragraphs (f)(5), (f)(6), and (f)(7), respectively, require that employers
ensure that attendants: communicate with authorized entrants as necessary to monitor entrant status and
to alert entrants of the need to evacuate the PRCS; monitor activities inside and outside the PRCS to
determine if the PRCS remains safe for authorized entrants and informs the rescue service whenever a nonentry or entry rescue is needed; and inform the employer when a non-entry or entry rescue begins or an
authorized entrant may need medical aid or assistance in escaping from the PRCS. In addition, proposed
paragraph (f)(11) requires that employers ensure that attendants warn any individual who is not an
authorized entrant and approaches a PRCS during entry operations to stay away from the PRCS; if the
individual enters the PRCS, the attendant must tell the individual to exit immediately, and inform the entry
supervisor and authorized entrants of the unauthorized entry.
OSHA believes that attendants’ communication with authorized entrants provides attendants
with information about conditions inside the PRCS that they must have to determine if the entry
should continue. By monitoring activities both inside and outside of the PRCS, the attendants,
who must remain outside the PRCS, can alert authorized entrants inside the PRCS to any
dangerous activities that may develop either outside or inside the PRCS; such monitoring would
enable employees involved in entry operations to take timely and appropriate action to protect
the authorized entrants from these dangerous activities. Having the attendant inform the
employer when a non-entry or entry rescue begins, or when an authorized entrant may need
medical aid or assistance in escaping from the PRCS, would alert the employer to a serious
incident so that the employer can facilitate the emergency response and provide whatever
assistance is necessary to protect the safety and health of authorized entrants. Finally, having the
attendant warn someone who is not an authorized entrant to stay away from the PRCS would
protect that individual from the hazards of the PRCS. Requiring the attendant to inform the
entry supervisor and the authorized entrants of the unauthorized entry is necessary because the
entry supervisor would have the requisite authority to order the removal of the unauthorized
individual, which may require the assistance of the authorized entrants.
Several provisions of proposed paragraph (g) of this section have paperwork requirements.
Proposed paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) specify, respectively, that employers ensure that
authorized entrants communicate with the attendant as necessary to help the attendant effectively
monitor the authorized entrant’s status, and to inform the attendant of any signs, symptoms,
unusual behavior, or other effects of PRCS hazards in themselves or other authorized entrants.
These proposed provisions would provide the attendant with information that the attendant can
use to determine whether to evacuate authorized entrants from the PRCS. Also, knowledge of
the signs, symptoms, unusual behavior, or other effects of PRCS hazards would enable
−7−

authorized entrants to report the debilitating effects of the PRCS hazards to the attendant,
thereby expediting a timely escape from the PRCS.
Paragraph (g)(4)(i) of this proposed section requires employers to ensure that authorized entrants
evacuate a PRCS quickly when ordered to do so by an attendant or entry supervisor. OSHA
believes that this provision would ensure that authorized entrants respond rapidly to an
evacuation order, regardless of who issues the order.
Proposed paragraph (h)(2) of this section specifies that employers must summon an entry-rescue
service under the following conditions: After initiating a non-entry rescue; when an entry
supervisor or attendant orders an evacuation; when an authorized entrant detects or learns of an
unplanned condition, any sign, symptom, unusual behavior or other effect of a hazard, or an
evacuation alarm; or when a reasonable probability exists that an authorized entrant may need
medical aid or assistance in exiting or escaping from the PRCS. OSHA believes that summoning
an entry-rescue service after initiating a non-entry rescue is necessary because time is of the
essence under these circumstances, and waiting to confirm injuries may jeopardize the health and
safety of the authorized entrants. Also, limiting the incapacitated entrants’ exposure to the PRCS
hazard could be critical to their health and safety, and a rapid response by the entry-rescue
service would reduce such exposures, especially if the non-entry rescue fails.
29 CFR 1926.1213 -- PRCS―Rescue Criteria
The requirement under proposed paragraph (a)(1) specifies that employers must ensure that attendants and
employees designated to perform non-entry rescue acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to perform
these rescues safely. This proposed provision would prevent these employees from sustaining injuries and
other harm while performing a non-entry rescue, thereby increasing the probability that they will retrieve an
authorized employee from the PRCS promptly and safely, efficiently, and effectively.10
Under proposed paragraph (b)(2), the employer must inform the rescue service, prior to the service entering
a PRCS to perform a rescue, of the physical and atmospheric hazards they are likely to encounter in the
PRCS, as well as other relevant information known by the employer. This information would permit
members of the rescue service to protect themselves from the specific hazards in the PRCS, especially the
hazards (or other conditions) that may be responsible for the casualty they were summoned to rescue; when
so protected, members of the rescue service can undertake safe and effective rescue operations.
Proposed paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) specify that employers must train members of the entryrescue service: to use properly the required personal protective equipment (PPE); to perform the assigned
rescue duties; and, in basic first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In addition, proposed
paragraph (c)(5) requires that employers ensure that at least one member of an entry-rescue service that
participates in onsite rescue operations holds current certification in first aid and CPR. Knowing how to
use PPE properly would provide assurance that the equipment is worn and used in such a manner
10

The Agency considers the requirement specified by proposed paragraph (a)(1) to be written in
performance-oriented language and, thus, not covered as a collection of information under the implementing rules
and guidelines of PRA-95. Note also that no record-retention requirement is specified for this proposed provision.
−8−

that the members of the rescue service receive maximum protection from the hazards in the
PRCS. Having adequate knowledge of how to perform the assigned rescue duties and the duties
of authorized entrants would allow the members of the entry-rescue service to perform the rescue
operations effectively, efficiency, and safely, thereby reducing further injury to the casualties
and decreasing their exposure, as well as the casualties’ exposure, to the PRCS hazards. Being
proficient in first aid and CPR, as well as requiring that at least one member of the rescue team
be certified in first aid and CPR, would ensure that the team members are able to effectively
stabilize the casualties medically until more advanced medical treatment is available. 11
29 CFR 1926.1214 -- PRCS―Entry Permits
As specified by proposed paragraph (b), employers must review, at least annually, PRCS entries made
during the previous 12 months. In doing so, employers must use information provided by
cancelled entry permits and any other available information. This proposed requirement would
identify both effective and deficient practices used during PRCS entries conducted during the
previous year, thereby ensuring that employers use the only practices during subsequent PRCS
entries that protect employees effectively against PRCS hazards.
29 CFR 1926.1216 -- Controlled-Atmosphere Confined Spaces―Requirements for Classification
and Accident Prevention and Protection
For each Controlled-Atmosphere Confined Space (CACS), proposed paragraph (a)(3) specifies that
employers must make an initial assessment of the CACS and document that all physical hazards have been
isolated and that ventilation alone is sufficient to control the atmospheric hazards. This document must
provide the following information: location of the CACS; identity of the physical hazards; methods used to
isolate the physical hazards; date and time the physical hazards were isolated, and the name and
signature/initials of the individual who completed the isolation work; the identity and safe levels of the
atmospheric hazards; methods used to control the atmospheric hazards; date and time of atmospheric
testing, and the name and signature/initials of the individual who completed the atmospheric testing; the
determination that, in the event the ventilation system stops working, the monitoring procedures will detect
an increase in atmospheric hazard levels in sufficient time for the entrants to safely exit the CACS; name
and signature/initials of the individual who completed this document; and the date and time for completing
this document. This proposed provision also requires that employers make this documentation available by
posting or other methods to each employee who enters the CACS and to that employee’s authorized
representative.
This proposed provision would document that all physical hazard have been isolated and that ventilation
alone is sufficient to control the atmospheric hazards by specifying the location of the CACS, the identity of
the physical and atmospheric hazards present in the CACS, and the methods used to protect employees
11

OSHA considers the requirement specified by proposed paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this section
to be written in performance-oriented language and, thus, not covered as a collection of information under the
implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95. In addition, the Agency concludes that holding certification in first
aid and CPR as specified by paragraph (c)(5) is a requirement for the job and, therefore, not covered by PRA-95.
Note that proposed paragraphs (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5)) do not require that employers to maintain training or
certification records.
−9−

entering the CACS from these hazards. Information about the location of the CACS would inform
employees and employers that the CACS is the correct one for conducting the planned entry operations.
The dates and times on the document would provide these employees and employers with assurance that
conditions in the confined space remain constant and safe. The proposed requirement for names and
signature/initials would enable the employees entering the CACS and employers to discuss any questions
they may have regarding the actions taken or the information provided with the individuals responsible for
the action/documentation. In addition, the required information would: ensure that conditions in the
CACS are safe for entry operations; be available for assessment purposes (e.g., to evaluate the
effectiveness of the ventilation system; to determine the cause of an accident); and enable
employees involved in entry operations, as well as their employers, to detect conditions that
deviate from the planned conditions specified in the document, and to take whatever action is
necessary to assure protection, including summoning the rescue service.
Under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this proposed section, employers must notify employees who will be in or near
a CACS, and their authorized representatives, about the location of, and the dangers posed by, the CACSs
at the job site. This information would ensure that employees who perform work in a CACS exit
the CACS if they detect one of the identified hazards, and also would prevent employees not
authorized to enter a CACS from doing so. 12
Proposed paragraph (b)(1)(ii) specifies that the employer must post danger signs to warn employees about
the CACSs. The contractor would post the signs near the outside entrances to the CACSs, and the signs
must use the following or similar language: "Danger—Controlled Atmosphere Confined Space—
Authorized Employees Only.” This provision states further that, when employers can demonstrate that
posting a sign is infeasible, they must use an equally effective means of warning employees. This
provision would augment the notification specified by proposed paragraph (b)(1)(i) by providing
employees in the vicinity of a CACS with a continuous warning regarding the presence and
dangers of the CACS. The signs would be especially useful in deterring employees not
authorized to enter a PRCS from doing so, thereby preventing serious harm to these
employees. 13
The first two provisions of proposed paragraph (b)(2) require that employers ensure that employees have
the knowledge and skills necessary to operate safely in a CACS, including: understanding the hazards in
the CACS and the methods used to isolate or control these hazards; recognition of the signs, symptoms, and
characteristic effects associated with these hazards; and, for those employees who will be in or near the
CACS but not authorized to perform entry rescues, an understanding of the dangers involved in such
rescues. The Agency believes that these proposed requirements would ensure that employees have
12

OSHA considers this proposed requirement to be usual and customary communications among contractors
and their employees; therefore, it does not impose burden hours or costs on the employers. In this regard,
information about locations and hazards of CACSs at the job site would be conveyed to employees or their
authorized representatives during discussions of work to be performed as a matter of usual and customary business
practice.
13
OSHA is taking only limited burden for this proposed requirement because the Agency is providing the
exact language that a contractor would use for the warning signs; accordingly, this provision is exempt under the
implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95, except in those cases in which employers provide similar language
for their signs. (See section (O) of Item 12 below for additional information.)
−10−

the knowledge and skill necessary to respond appropriately to CACS hazards, as well as knowledge of the
methods used to protect them from these hazards. The proposed provisions would permit employees to
determine how the hazards associated with construction activities affect conditions in the CACS.
This information would enable the employees to maintain safe entry conditions in the CACS
while performing their assigned tasks, and to evacuate the CACS if conditions become
hazardous, the hazard-protection methods fail, or they develop signs, symptoms, or characteristic
effects associated with the CACS hazards. In addition, the proposed paragraph would train
employees located in or near a CACS but not authorized to perform entry rescues about the
dangers of trying to rescue an injured employee inside the CACS; this knowledge would prevent
them from endangering themselves and perhaps the injured employee. 14
Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(iii) specifies that employers must ensure that employees who enter CACSs have
the appropriate knowledge and skills prior to initially entering a CACS. If an employee the employer
anticipates will be in or near the CACS receives a new CACS-related task to perform, the employer must
provide that employee with whatever additional training on this task is necessary to maintain the CACS
classification prior to the employee reentering the CACS to perform the task. Should the employer find a
new hazard in the CACS for which an employee has received no previous training, the employer must
ensure that the employee exits the CACS and receives the necessary training regarding the new hazard
before resuming work in the CACS. Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(iv) consists of a general requirement for
employers to ensure that employees can demonstrate proficiency in the duties required by this proposed
section.
OSHA believes that employees must have the requisite knowledge and skills regarding safe
CACS operations prior to starting work in a CACS or they would be unable to respond
appropriately to the CACS hazards, thereby endangering themselves and other employees in or
near the CACS. Training employees on newly assigned tasks before they continue CACS
operations would ensure that they have the knowledge and skills necessary to perform the new
tasks without making errors that could affect safe CACS operations. Training employees
regarding new hazards before they resume work in the CACS would permit them recognize the
effects of these hazards and understand applicable protection measures (e.g., evacuating the
CACS if necessary). Ensuring that employees can demonstrate proficiency in the duties required by this
proposed section would require employers to determine the effectiveness of the training specified by
this proposed section. In doing so, employers would ensure that employees have an
understanding of, and can apply proficiently and appropriately, the knowledge and skills
required to work safely while exposed to the initial and subsequent hazards present in the CACS.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(v) specifies that employers are to maintain records demonstrating that
employees accomplished the requisite training prior to entering the CACS. These records must contain the
employee's name, names of the trainers, and dates of the training. The Agency believes that
maintaining such records is necessary to ensure that employees who require training in CACS
hazards receive that training. OSHA recognizes that construction work is transient and that the
turnover rate for employees on construction sites is higher than in many other industries.
14

The Agency concludes that these proposed requirements are written in performance-oriented language
and, thus, are not considered collections of information under the implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95.
−11−

Therefore, the documentation required by this proposed provision would ensure that employers
are able to determine whether an employee has the training necessary to work effectively and
safely in a specific CACS without endangering themselves and other employees. Having the
names of trainers on the document serves to corroborate the record, and trainers can provide
information to the employer on the level of competence demonstrated by the employee.
Including the date in the record allows the employer to determine whether an employee needs
updated or refresher training before entering the CACS. Finally, these records would provide
information to the employer about whether the training meets the needs of the employees and
results in safe and effective CACS entry operations.
Proposed paragraphs (d)(4) and (e)(3) require employers to document, both immediately before and during
CACS entry, that all physical hazards in the CACS remain isolated and that all atmospheric hazards remain
controlled. These documents must provide the following information: location of the CACS; identity of
the physical hazards; methods used to isolate the physical hazards; date and time for determining that all
physical hazards remain isolated, and the name and signature/initials of the individual who made the
determination; identity and safe level of atmospheric hazards; methods for controlling the atmospheric
hazards; atmospheric-testing/-monitoring results; date and time of atmospheric testing/-monitoring, and the
name and signature/initials of the individual who completed the atmospheric testing/-monitoring; name and
signature/initials of the individual who completed the document; and the date and time the document was
completed. In addition, both of these proposed provisions also require that employers make this
documentation available by posting or other methods to each employee who enters the CACS and to that
employee’s authorized representative.
These proposed provisions would assure both employees and employers that, immediately before and
during CACS entry, all physical hazards in the CACS remain isolated and that the atmospheric hazards in
the CACS remain controlled by providing them with information confirming that: the CACS is the correct
one for conducting the planned entry operations; conditions and hazard-protective methods used in the
CACS just prior to and during entry do not vary from the conditions and hazard-protective methods
described in the document required under paragraph (a)(3) of this proposed section; and the hazardprotective methods used are appropriate to the hazards and conditions in the CACS. The dates and times
on the documents would inform these employees and employers regarding the timeliness of the
documentation. The proposed requirement for names and signature/initials would enable these employees
and employers to discuss any questions they may have regarding the actions taken or the information
provided with the individuals responsible for the action/documentation. In addition, the required
information would: ensure that conditions in the CACS are safe for entry operations; be
available for assessment purposes (e.g., to evaluate the effectiveness of the ventilation system; to
determine the cause of an accident); and enable employees involved in entry operations, as well
as their employers, to detect conditions that deviate from the planned conditions specified in the
document, and to take whatever action is necessary to assure protection, including summoning
the rescue service.
29 CFR 1926.1217 -- Isolated-Hazard Confined Spaces―Requirements for Classification and
Accident Prevention and Protection

−12−

Paragraph (a)(4) requires employers to document the initial determination that all physical and atmospheric
hazards have been isolated in an Isolated-Hazard Confined Space (IHCS), while paragraph (d)(3) specifies
that employers, before employees enter an IHCS, must document the determination that all physical and
atmospheric hazards remain isolated. These documents must provide the following information: location
of the IHCS; identity of the physical hazards; ,methods used to isolate the physical hazards; date and time
for determining that the physical hazards have been/remain isolated, and the name and signature/initials of
the individual who completed the isolation work/made the determination that the physical hazards remain
isolated; identity of the atmospheric hazards; methods used to isolate the atmospheric hazards; date and
time for determining that the atmospheric hazards have been/remain isolated, and the name and
signature/initials of the individual who completed the isolation work/made the determination that the
atmospheric hazards remain isolated; name and signature/initials of the individual who completed the
document; and date and time for completing the document. In addition, both proposed provisions require
employers to make the documentation available by posting or other methods to each employee who enters
the IHCS and that employee’s authorized representative.
These proposed provisions would inform both employees who enter a specific IHCS and their employers
about the conditions and hazards in the IHCS and the methods used to isolate these hazards after the initial
IHCS assessment and again just before employees enter the IHSC. The information regarding the initial
IHCS assessment would provide the employees and employers with knowledge of the IHCS hazards, and
whether the methods used to isolate these hazards are appropriate. Documentation of the IHCS hazards
and hazard-isolation methods just prior to IHCS entry would allow employees and employers to confirm
the effectiveness of hazard-isolation methods (i.e., to readily identify deficiencies in these methods).
Information about the location of the CACS would provide assurance to employees and employers that the
IHCS is the correct one for conducting the planned entry operations. The dates and times on the documents
would inform these employees and employers about the timeliness of the required actions and
documentation. The proposed requirement for names and signature/initials would enable the employees
and employers to discuss any questions they may have regarding the actions taken or information provided
with the individuals responsible for the actions/documentation. In addition, the required information
would: ensure that conditions in the IHCS are safe for entry operations; be available for
assessment purposes (e.g., to evaluate the effectiveness of the isolation methods; to determine
the cause of an accident); and enable employers and employees involved in entry operations to
detect conditions, especially during entry operations, that deviate from the planned conditions
specified in the document after the initial and pre-entry assessments, and to take whatever action
is necessary to assure protection, including summoning the rescue service.

Before any employee enters an IHCS, the two provisions of proposed paragraph (b) require that employers
ensure that employees have: the knowledge and skills necessary to recognize the signs, symptoms, and
characteristic effects associated with exposure to the isolated IHCS hazards; an understanding of the
methods used to isolate these hazards; and, for those employees who will be in or near the IHCS but not
authorized to perform entry rescues, an understanding of the dangers of attempting such rescues. A note to
this proposed paragraph states explicitly that employers are not required to maintain any record of this
training.

−13−

The Agency believes that these proposed requirements would ensure that employees recognize IHCS
hazards, have knowledge of the methods used to protect them from these hazards, and develop appropriate
responses to the hazards. In this regard, recognizing the signs, symptoms, and characteristic effects
associated with exposure to the isolated IHCS hazards would enable employees to detect failures in the
methods used to isolate IHCS hazards and to evacuate the IHCS if necessary. The proposed provisions
also would allow employees to determine if their tasks or the work processes in the IHCS could
adversely affect the proper functioning of the hazard-isolation methods. In addition, training
employees located in or near a CACS but not authorized to perform entry rescues about the
dangers of trying to rescue an injured employee inside the CACS would prevent them from
endangering themselves and perhaps the injured employee by making such an attempt. 15
29 CFR 1926.1219 Records
The provisions of this proposed section specify requirements for various records required by the proposed
Standard. In this regard, proposed paragraph (a) states that employers must maintain a copy of the Standard
at job sites where a confined space is present or, alternatively, they may maintain at a job site a copy of a
written confined-space program that incorporates the requirements of the Standard. Under proposed
paragraph (b), employers must retain a copy of each entry permit for at least one year.16 Paragraph (c) of
this proposed section requires employers to retain the training records specified by proposed 29 CFR
1926.1209(d)(5) (PRCSs) and 1926.1216(b)(2)(v) (CACSs) for the period that the employees addressed by
the records are employed by them,17 while proposed paragraph (d) specifies that employers must retain the
documents required by 29 CFR 1926.1216(a)(3), (d)(4), and (e)(3) (CACSs) and 1926.1217(a)(4) and
(c)(3) (IHCSs) until they complete the work in these confined space. Under paragraph (e), employers must
make the documents retained under this proposed section available on request to the Secretary or the
Secretary’s designee.
OSHA believes that employers and employees would use the copy of the Standard to determine
that the procedures necessary for safe entry into a confined space have been followed. As noted
previously, training records would enable employers to determine which employees received the
training necessary to enter a confined space safely. Retaining a copy of the assessments made of
CACSs and IHCSs until the entry operations into these confined spaces have been completed
would provide employers and employees with the identity of the confined spaces at a job site,
the physical and atmospheric hazards in these confined spaces, and the methods used to protect
the employees from these hazards. Accordingly, this information would permit employers and
employees to systematically evaluate the hazards in confined spaces before entry is attempted,
15

The Agency concludes that these proposed requirements are written in performance-oriented language
and, thus, are not considered collections of information under the implementing rules and guidelines of PRA-95.
16
A note to this proposed paragraph also states that when an entry permit is considered an employee
exposure record under 29 CFR 1910.1020 (Access to employee exposure and medical records), employers must
retain the entry permit as specified by 29 CFR 1910.1020. (29 CFR 1910.1020 is applicable to construction under
29 CFR 1926.33.)
17
Proposed paragraphs (d)(5) of 29 CFR 1926.1209 and (b)(2)(v) of 29 CFR 1926.1216 also require retention of training
records. Therefore, OSHA is accounting for the burden hours and cost for retaining these records under the
determinations made separately for these two paragraphs in sections (D) and (P), respectively, of Item 12 below, and not for
the determinations made in section (S) of Item 12 for this proposed section (29 CFR 1926.1219).
−14−

determine whether conditions in the confined space have deviated from planned conditions, and
ensure that adequate measures have been taken to make the spaces safe for entry. Finally, the
Agency’s compliance safety and health officers would need the information to determine, during
an inspection, that the employer has specified entry conditions and procedures, and has
implemented the specified entry procedures in accordance with the requirements of the standard.
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 burden.

Employers would be able to use automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
information-collection techniques, or other forms of information technology when establishing
and retaining the required records. The Agency wrote the paperwork requirements of the
proposed Standard in performance-oriented language (i.e., in terms of what data to collect, not
how to record the data). However, the following proposed paragraphs would require employers
to prepare written documents that must include the signature/initials of the individual who
prepares the documentation: paragraphs (a)(3), (d)(4), (e)(3) of proposed 29 CFR 1926.1216;
and paragraphs (a)(4) and (c)(3) of proposed 29 CFR 1926.1217. Employers may scan and
electronically maintain copies of these signed records.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available
cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

The proposed requirements to collect and retain information are specific to each employer and
employee involved, and no other source or agency duplicates these proposed requirements or can
make the proposed information available to OSHA (i.e., the proposed information is available
only from employers).
5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities (Item 5 of OMB Form 83-I),
describe any methods used to minimize the burden.

The information-collection requirements specified by the proposed Standard would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
6. Describe the consequence 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 the burden.

The Agency believes that the information-collection frequencies required by the proposed
Standard are the minimum frequencies that would be necessary to effectively regulate confined
spaces and, thereby, fulfill its mandate “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”
as specified in the Act at 29 U.S.C. 651. Accordingly, if employers do not perform the proposed
information collections, or delay in providing this information, employees may be subject to an
increased risk of death and serious injury when working in confined spaces.

−15−

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-inaid, 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 confidentially that is not supported by authority established in statue 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 prove that it has instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentially to
the extent permitted by law.

No special circumstances exist that would require employers to collect the proposed information
using the procedures specified by this Item. The proposed requirements are within the
guidelines set forth in 5 CFR 1320.5.
8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date 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 those 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 3 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.

In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.11, OSHA is submitting an information collection request (ICR)
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the proposed Confined Spaces in
Construction Standard (29 CFR part 1926, subpart AA). A copy of the proposed rule is attached
to this Supporting Statement. Members of the public who wish to comment on the ICR must
−16−

submit written comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, New Executive
Office Building, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503; Attn: OSHA Deck Officer (RIN 1218-AB47). The Agency will
summarize comments submitted by the public to OMB on the ICR, and will include the summary
in its request to OMB for final approval for the ICR.
OSHA also encourages the public to submit copies of their comments on the ICR to the
rulemaking docket (Docket No. OSHA-2007-0026). All comments received on the ICR will be
made part of the record on the proposed Standard. For information on how to submit comments
and access the rulemaking docket, see the “Public Participation” section in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking at http://www.regulations.gov or contact the OSHA Docket Office, Room
N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-2350
(OSHA’s TTY number is (877) 889-5627).
9. Explain any decision to provide any payments or gift to respondents, other than reenumeration 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.

The paperwork requirements specified by the proposed Standard do not involve confidential
information.
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.

None of the paperwork provisions in the proposed Standard require 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 in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.

·

Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of
information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out or

−17−

paying outside parties for information collection activities should not be included here. Instead, this
cost should be included in Item 13.

Burden-Hour and Cost Determinations
Estimates of the burden hours and cost for each information collection requirement in the
proposed Standard are shown below (with a summary of these estimates, as well as the estimated
number of responses for each of these requirements, provided in Table 1). Information regarding
the number of employers/establishments, total number of confined spaces, total number of each
type of confined space (i.e., Permit-Required Confined Space, Controlled-Atmosphere Confined
Space, and Isolated-Hazard Confined Space), total number of employees exposed to confined
spaces, and total number of employees exposed to each type of confined space is from a report
entitled “Rulemaking Support for the Proposed OSHA Confined Space Standard for
Construction” by the CONSAD Research Corporation (“the CONSAD Report”); 18 the CONSAD
Report is available as Exhibit 4 in the docket established for the proposed Standard. 19 OSHA
estimated most burden-hour determinations using construction experts from its staff; however,
when so indicated, several of these determinations are from the “Preliminary Regulatory Impact
Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis” (Pre-RIA; see Exhibit 3) prepared for the
proposed Standard.
In determining the wage rates for the various occupations that perform the paperwork
requirements, the Agency relied on the rates used in the CONSAD report. The specific wage
rate for each occupation is provided as follows:
·
·
·
·

Supervisor:
Specifically skilled employee:
Clerical employee:
General construction employee:

$31.61
$25.15
$14.62
$22.09

(A) 29 CFR 1926.1204(c)
The CONSAD Report found that contractors encounter about 640,682 confined spaces each
year, while the Pre-RIA finds that a supervisor would take five minutes (.08 hours) to provide
the required information regarding each confined space to a controlling contractor or host
employer. The estimated annual burden hours and cost for this proposed paragraph is:
Burden hours: 640,682 confined spaces x .08 hours = 51,255 hours
Cost: 51,255 hours x $31.61 = $1,620,171
(B) 29 CFR 1926.1205(b)(1)

18

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Office of
Regulatory Analysis by CONSAD Research Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, June 8, 2005.
19
The docket may be accessed at www.regulations.gov.
−18−

The Agency estimates that a supervisor would take five minutes (.08 hours) to collect
information on an IDLH exposure (e.g., the name of the atmospheric contaminant, the level of
exposure) and provide or communicate it to a medical facility that is treating an employee
exposed to the IDLH atmosphere in a confined space. In addition, OSHA assumes that 100 such
treatments would occur each year. The yearly burden hours and cost for this proposed
requirement is estimated to be:
Burden hours: 100 treatments x .08 hours = 8 hours
Cost: 8 hours x $31.61 = $253
(C) 29 CFR 1926.1209(a)(2)
Based on data from the CONSAD Report, employees would enter about 115,963 PRCSs each
year. 20 The language on the warning signs required by this proposed paragraph for these PRCSs
is provided by the proposed Standard (i.e., "Danger—Permit Required Confined Space—Authorized
Employees Only” or “Danger—Do Not Enter Without a Permit”). Therefore, in accordance with 5
CFR 1320.3(c)(2) of PRA-95, this proposed requirement does not fall within the definition of a
collection of information. However, the proposed paragraph allows the employer to use similar
language on the danger sign if desired. The Agency believes an employer would only rarely opt
for similar language. For the purposes of this Supporting Statement, OSHA estimates that two
percent of the PRCSs would include a danger sign with language other than that provided by the
proposed paragraph. The Agency also assumes that signs would last five years (i.e., an average
annual rate of 20 percent), and that it would take a general construction employee five minutes
(.08 hours) to fabricate a sign with the appropriate language. OSHA estimates the annual burden
hours and cost for this proposed requirement are:
Burden hours: 115,963 PRCSs x .02 (% of signs) x .20 (annual rate) x .08 hours =
37 hours
Cost: 37 hours x $22.09 = $817
(D) 29 CFR 1926.1209(d)(5)
According to information available in the CONSAD Report, the Agency estimates that
approximately 217,200 employees would enter PRCSs annually. 21 OSHA believes that each
year, ten percent of these employees (21,720) would be new employees, employees who receive
new PRCS-related tasks, or employees exposed to a new PRCS hazard; a new training record
would have to be generated and maintained for these employees under the proposed paragraph.
20

The CONSAD Report determined that employees make 5,046,068 entries into a total of 640,682 confined
spaces each year, and that 913,014 (18.1%) of these entries involve PRCSs. Assuming that the number of confinedspace entries is proportionate to the different types of confined spaces, then 115,963 of the 640,682 confined spaces
(i.e., 18.1% x 640,682 confined spaces) would be PRCSs.
21
The CONSAD Report found that 1,200,000 employees enter confined spaces each year. Assuming that
the number of employees entering PRCSs is proportionate to the percentage of confined spaces that are classified as
PRCSs (i.e., 18.1%), then 217,200 of the employees who enter confined spaces would be entering PRCSs (i.e.,
18.1% x 1,200,000 employees).
−19−

The Agency estimates that a clerical employee would take one minute (.02 hours) to maintain a
training record for the 195,480 employees who require no new training (i.e., 217,200 total
employees – 21,720 employees requiring a new training record), and three minutes (.05 hours) to
generate and maintain a training record for each of the 21,720 new or retrained employees. The
annual burden hours and cost for this proposed provision are estimated to be:
Burden hours: (195,480 employees requiring no new training x .02 hours to maintain their
records) + (21,720 new or retrained employees x .05 hours to generate and
retain their records) = 4,996 hours
Cost: 4,996 hours x $14.62 = $73,042
(E) 29 CFR 1926.1209(f)
OSHA assumes that a supervisor would take 30 minutes (.50 hours) to develop procedures for
safely terminating PRCS entry operations for both planned and emergency conditions for each of
the 115,963 PRCSs established each year. The yearly burden hours and cost of this proposed
provision is estimated to be:
Burden hours: 115,963 PRCSs x .50 hours = 57,982 hours
Cost: 57,982 hours x $31.61 = $1,832,811
(F) 29 CFR 1926.1210(a)
Before any employees enters one of the 115,963 PRCSs established each year, proposed
paragraph (a) requires employers to prepare a written entry permit and post it at the point where
employees enter the PRCS. Each entry permit must contain the information specified by 29 CFR
1926.1214 of the proposed Standard. The Agency assumes that it would take an average of
fifteen minutes (.25 hours) for a general construction employee to generate and post each entry
permit. The estimated annual burden hours and cost of these proposed requirements are:
Burden hours: 115,963 entry permits x .25 hours = 28,991 hours
Cost: 28,991 hours x $22.09 = $640,411
(G) 29 CFR 1926.1210(e)(2)(v) and 1926.1211(e)(3)
According to the CONSAD report, employees would make 913,014 PRCS entries each year.
The Agency assumes that it would take one minute (.02 hours) for entry supervisors, who are general
construction employees, to sign an entry permit for each of these entries, and that, for ten percent (91,301)
of these entries, a replacement entry supervisor would have to sign the entry permit. OSHA estimates that
the annual burden hours and cost of this proposed provision are:
Burden hours: (913,014 entries + 91,301 entries) x .02 hours = 20,086 hours
Cost: 20,086 hours x $22.09 = $443,700

−20−

(H) 29 CFR 1926.1211(c)
Proposed paragraph (c) requires that employers, during entry operations, document on each PRCS entry
permit specific information about the physical and atmospheric hazards in the PRCS, including any
atmospheric monitoring results obtained during entry operations. OSHA estimates that it would take an
average of 10 minutes (.17 hours) for a specially skilled employee to generate the required
information on each of the 115,963 entry permits generated each year. The yearly burden hours
and cost of this proposed paragraph are estimated to be:
Burden hours: 115,963 entry permits x .17 hours = 19,714 hours
Cost: 19,714 hours x $25.15 = $495,807
(I) 29 CFR 1926.1211(f)(5), (f)(6), (f)(7), and (f)(11)
OSHA estimates the following burden hours for an attendant, who is a general construction
employee, to accomplish these proposed paperwork requirements: for each of the 913,014 PRCS
entries, fifteen minutes (.25 hours) to communicate with authorized entrants as necessary while
monitoring their status, and to alert them of the need to evacuate the PRCS; for the one-tenth of one per cent
(913) of these entries estimated to involve rescue operations, two minutes (.03 hours) to recognize unsafe
conditions, inform the entry-rescue service whenever a non-entry or entry rescue is needed, and inform the
employer when an non-entry or entry rescue begins or an authorized entrant may need medical aid or
assistance in escaping from the PRCS; and, for ten percent (91,301) of these entries, one minute (.02 hours)
to warn any individual who is not an authorized entrant and approaches a PRCS during entry operations to
stay away from the PRCS or to exit the PRCS if that individual enters the PRCS, as well as to inform the
authorized entrant and entry supervisor of any such unauthorized entry. The estimated burdens hours and
cost for these proposed requirements each year are:
Burden hours: (913,014 entries x .25 hours) + (913 entries x .03 hours) + (91,301 entries
x .02 hours) = 230,107 hours
Cost: 230,107 hours x $22.09 = $5,083,064
(J) 29 CFR 1926.1211(g)(2), (g)(3), and (g)(4)(i)
The Agency assumes that attendants, who are general construction employees, would take a total
of fifteen minutes (.25 hours) during each of the 913,014 entries to communicate with the
attendant who is monitoring their status, and to inform the attendant of any signs, symptoms, unusual
behavior, or other effects of PRCS hazards in themselves or other authorized entrants.
Additionally, OSHA estimates that an attendant or entry supervisor would take one minute (.02
hours) to order authorized entrants to evacuate a PRCS when evacuation is necessary (i.e., for
the one per cent (9,130) of entries in which an attendant observes unsafe conditions). The
Agency determines that the yearly burden hours and cost of these proposed provisions to be:
Burden hours: (913,014 entries x .25 hours) + (9,130 entries x .02 hours) = 228,437 hours
Cost: 228,437 hours x $22.09 = $5,046,173
−21−

(K) 29 CFR 1926.1211(h)(2)
For the one-tenth of one per cent (913) of entries that may involve rescue, OSHA estimates that a
supervisor would take two minutes (.03 hours) to summon an entry-rescue service after a nonentry rescue begins; when an entry supervisor or attendant orders an evacuation; when an
authorized entrant detects or learns of an unplanned condition, any sign, symptom, unusual
behavior or other effect of a hazard, or an evacuation alarm; or when a reasonable probability
exists that an authorized entrant may need medical aid or assistance in exiting or escaping from
the PRCS. The estimated annual burden hours and cost of this proposed paragraph are:
Burden hours: (913 entries x .03 hours) = 27 hours
Cost: 27 hours x $31.61 = $853
(L) 29 CFR 1926.1213(b)(2)
For the one-tenth of one per cent (913) of entries that may involve rescue, the Agency assumes that
it would take a supervisor two minutes (.03 hours) to inform the entry-rescue service, prior to entering a
PRCS to perform a rescue, of the physical and atmospheric hazards they are likely to encounter in the
PRCS, as well as other relevant information known by the employer. OSHA determines that the burden
hours and cost of this proposed provision each year to be:
Burden hours: (913 entries x .03 hours) = 27 hours
Cost: 27 hours x $31.61 = $853
(M) 29 CFR 1926.1214(b)
OSHA believes that it would take a supervisor fifteen minutes (.25 hours) to review each of the 115,963
cancelled entry permits and other available related information collected each year. The yearly burden
hours and cost for this proposed requirement is estimated to be:
Burden hours: 115,963 reviews x .25 hours = 28,991 hours
Cost: 28,991 hours x $31.61 = $916,406
(N) 29 CFR 1926.1216(a)(3)
Based on data in the CONSAD Report, the Agency finds that employers would perform entry
operations in 213,988 CACSs each year. 22 OSHA estimates that specially skilled employees
would take ten minutes (.17 hours) to document initial CACS conditions as required by this
proposed provision. In addition, the Agency assumes that employers would make these
22

The CONSAD Report determined that employees make 5,046,068 entries into a total of 640,682 confined
spaces each year, and that 1,687,457 (33.4%) of these entries involve CACSs. Assuming that confined-space entries
are distributed proportionately among the different types of confined spaces, then 213,988 of the 640,682 confined
spaces (i.e., 33.4% x 640,682 confined spaces) would be CACSs.
−22−

documents available to the employees entering a CACS, and to their authorized representatives,
by having a construction employee post a copy of the document near the entrance to the CACS, and that it
would take construction employees one minute (.02 hours) to do so for each of the 213,988 CACSs
established each year. The burden-hour and cost estimates for developing and posting the proposed
documentation are:
Burden hours: (213,988 CACSs x .17 hours (document development)) +
(213,988 CACS x .08 hours (posting)) = 53,497 hours
Cost: (36,378 hours x $25.15 (document development)) +
(17,119 hours x $22.09 (posting)) = $1,293,066
(O) 29 CFR 1926.1216(b)(1)(ii)
The language on the warning signs required by this proposed paragraph for CACSs is provided
by the proposed Standard (i.e., "Danger—Controlled Atmosphere Confined Space—Authorized
Employees Only”). Therefore, in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2) of PRA-95, this proposed
requirement does not fall within the definition of a collection of information. However, the
proposed paragraph allows the employer to use similar language on the danger sign if desired.
The Agency believes an employer would only rarely opt for similar language. For the purposes
of this Supporting Statement, OSHA estimates that two percent of the 213,988 CACSs would
have a danger sign with language other than that provided by the proposed paragraph. The
Agency also assumes that signs would last five years (i.e., an average annual rate of 20 percent),
and that it would take a general construction employee five minutes (.08 hours) to fabricate a
sign with the appropriate language. OSHA estimates the annual burden hours and cost for this
proposed requirement to be:
Burden hours: 213,988 CACSs x .02 (% of signs) x .20 (annual rate) x .08 hours = 68 hours
Cost: 68 hours x $22.09 = $1,502
(P) 29 CFR 1926.1216(b)(2)(v)
According to information available from the CONSAD Report, the Agency estimates that about
400,800 employees would enter CACSs annually. 23 OSHA believes that each year, ten percent
of these employees (40,080) would be new employees, employees who receive new CACSrelated tasks, or employee exposed to a new CACS hazard; a new training record would have to
be generated and maintained for these employees under the proposed paragraph. The Agency
estimates that a clerical employee would take one minute (.02 hours) to maintain a training
record for the 360,720 employees who require no new training (i.e., 400,800 total employees –
40,080 employees requiring a new training record), and three minutes (.05 hours) to generate and

23

The CONSAD Report found that 1,200,000 employees enter confined spaces each year. Assuming that
the number of employees entering CACSs is proportionate to the percentage of confined spaces that are classified as
CACSs (i.e., 33.4.1%), then 400,800 of the employees who enter confined spaces would be entering CACSs (i.e.,
33.4% x 1,200,000 employees).
−23−

maintain a training record for each of the 40,080 new or retrained employees. The annual
burden hours and cost for this proposed provision are estimated to be:
Burden hours: (360,720 employees requiring no new training x .02 hours to maintain their
records) + (40,080 new or retrained employees x .05 hours to generate and
retain their records) = 9,218 hours
Cost: 9,218 hours x $14.62 = $134,767
(Q) 29 CFR 1926.1216(d)(4) and (e)(3)
These two proposed paragraph require documentation of CACS conditions just before and
during CACS entry operations. OSHA estimates that it would take a specially skilled employee
ten minutes (.17 hours) to complete each document. Additionally, the Agency assumes that
employers would make these documents available to the employees entering a CACS, and to
their authorized representatives, by having a construction employee post a copy of each document near
the entrance to the CACS, and that it would take construction employees one minute (.02 hours) to post
each document at each of the 213,988 CACSs established each year. The burden-hour and cost
estimates for these two proposed provisions are:
Burden hours: (213,988 CACSs x 2 documents x .17 hours (document development)) +
(213,988 CACSs x 2 documents x .08 hours (posting)) = 106,994 hours
Cost: (72,756 hours x $25.15 (document development)) +
(34,238 hours x $22.09 (posting)) = $2,586,131
(R) 29 CFR 1926.1217(a)(4) and (c)(3)
Based on information available in the CONSAD Report, OSHA determined that employers
would perform entry operations in 310,731 IHCSs. 24 Under these two proposed paragraphs,
employers must provide information on initial IHCS conditions, as well as IHCS conditions just
before beginning entry operations, in two separate documents. The Agency believes that
specially skilled employees would take ten minutes (.17 hours) to complete and maintain each
document. Additionally, OSHA assumes that employers would make these documents available
to the employees entering a IHCS, and to their authorized representatives, by having a construction
employee post a copy of each document near the entrance to the CACS, and that it would take construction
employees one minute (.02 hours) to post each document at each of the 310,731 IHCSs established each
year. OSHA estimates the burden hours and cost for these two proposed provisions to be:
Burden hours: (310,731 IHCSs x 2 documents x .17 hours (document development)) +
(310,731 IHCSs x 2 documents x .08 hours (posting)) = 155,366 hours
Cost: (105,649 hours x $25.15 (document development)) +
24

The CONSAD Report determined that employees make 5,046,068 entries into a total of 640,682 confined
spaces each year, and that 2,445,597 (48.5%) of these entries involve IHCSs. Assuming that confined-space entries
are distributed proportionately among the different types of confined spaces, then 310,731 of the 640,682 confined
spaces (i.e., 48.5% x 640,682 confined spaces) would be CACSs.
−24−

(49,716 hours x $22.09(posting)) = $3,755,298
(S) 29 CFR 1926.1219(a), (b), and (d)
The Agency believes that it would take a general construction employee one minute (.02 hours) to post a
copy of the Standard or a copy of a confined-space program at the 640,682 job sites having confined spaces
as required by proposed paragraph (a). For the written confined-space programs mentioned in proposed
paragraph (a), OSHA assumes that the employers at one per cent (6,407) of these job sites would opt to
write a confined-space program for posting, and that it would take a supervisor one hour to develop a
written program. The Agency determined that a clerical employee would require one minute (.02 hours) to
retain each of the 115,963 PRCS entry permits for at least one year as specified by proposed paragraph (b).
Regarding the proposed requirement to maintain the documents specified by paragraph (d) until employees
complete their work in CACSs and IHCSs, OSHA determined that a clerical employee would take one
minute (.02 hours) for each of these records. Accordingly, clerical employees would maintain a total of
641,964 documents describing initial, pre-entry, and during-entry conditions in CACSs (i.e., 213,988
CACSs x 3 types of conditions (initial, pre-entry, and during-entry)), and a total of 621,462 documents
describing initial and pre-entry conditions in IHCSs (i.e., 310,731 IHCSs x 2 types of conditions (initial and
pre-entry)). For these proposed paperwork requirements, OSHA determined the annual burden hours and
cost to be:25
Burden hours: 640,682 confined-space postings x .02 hours = 12,814 hours
6,407 written confined-space programs for posting x 1.00 hour = 6,407
hours
115,963 PRCS entry permits (retain) x .02 hours = 2,319 hours
641,964 CACS initial, pre-entry, and during-entry documents (retain) x .02
hours = 12,839 hours
621,462 IHCS initial and pre-entry documents (retain) x .02 hours =
12,429 hours
Total burden
hours: 46,808 hours
Cost: (12,814 hours x $14.62) + (6,407 hours x $31.61) + (2,319 x $14.62) +
(12,839 hours x $14.62) + (12,429 hours x $14.62) = $793,188
(T) Records Disclosure (§1926.1219(e))
The Agency assumes that it would take two minutes (.03 hours) for a supervisor to disclose to an OSHA
compliance officer during an inspection the location of the documents required to be retained by employers
under this proposed section, and that OSHA compliance officers would conduct inspections at 1,271
establishments each year.26 The estimated annual burden hours and cost of this proposed provision are:
25

Footnote 17 provides an explanation for excluding paragraph (c) of 29 CFR 1926.1219 from this
determination.
26
The Agency estimated the number of inspections by determining the inspection rate (1.4%) for all
establishments under the jurisdiction of the Act (including both Federal OSHA and approved state-plan agencies),
and then multiplying the total number of establishments regulated under the proposed Standard by this percentage
−25−

Burden hours: 1,271 establishments inspected x .03 hours to disclose records = 38 hours
Cost: 38 hours x $31.61 = $1,201
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
service 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 of 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 a part of this cost burden estimate. In developing cost burden estimates, agencies
may consult with a sample of respondent (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.

Item 12 above provides the total cost of the information collection requirements specified by the
proposed Standard.
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), 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.

OSHA estimates that a compliance officer (GS-12, step 5), with an hourly wage rate of $34.15,
would spend about five minutes (.08 hour) during an inspection reviewing the documents
required by the proposed Standard. The Agency determines that its compliance officers would
inspect about 1,271 establishments that conduct entry operations in confined spaces regulated by
the proposed Standard during each year covered by this ICR (see section (T) under Item 12
above). OSHA considers other expenses, such as equipment, overhead, and support staff
salaries, to be normal operating expenses that would occur without the paperwork requirements
specified by the proposed Standard. Therefore, the total cost of these paperwork requirements to
the Federal government is:

(i.e., 90,760 establishments x 1.4% = 1,271 establishment inspected per year.
−26−

Cost: 1,271 inspections x .08 hour x $34.15 = $3,472
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB
Form 83-1.

The burden hours for the collection of information requirements contained in the proposed
Standard would result in a total program change of 1,017,788 hours. No costs are reported under
Item 14 of the OMB 83-I.
16. For collections 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 information, completion of report,
publication dates, and other actions.

OSHA will not publish the information collected under the proposed 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.

This Supporting Statement was developed for the proposed Standard; therefore, no expiration
date would be displayed.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification for Paperwork
Reduction Act Submission," of OMB Form 83-I.

OSHA is not seeking an exception to the certification statement specified by Item 19 of OMB
83-I.

−27−

Table 1
Proposed Burden Hours, Number of Responses, and Proposed Cost Each Year
for the Proposed Information Collection Requirements
Proposed
No. of
Burden Hours Responses
51,255
640,682
8
100
37
464
4,996
217,200
57,982
115,963
28,991
115,963

Information Collection Requirement
(A) 29 CFR 1926.1204(c)
(B) 29 CFR 1926.1205(b)(1)
(C) 29 CFR 1926.1209(a)(2)
(D) 29 CFR 1926.1209(d)(5)
(E) 29 CFR 1926.1209(f)
(F) 29 CFR 1926.1210(a)
(G) 29 CFR 1926.1210(e)(2)(v) and (e)(3)
(H) 29 CFR 1926.1211(c)
(I) 29 CFR 1926.1211(f)(5), (f)(6), (f)(7), and (f)(11)
(J) 29 CFR 1926.1211(g)(2), (g)(3), and (g)(4)(i)
(K) 29 CFR 1926.1211(h)(2)
(L) 29 CFR 1926.1213(b)(2)
(M) 29 CFR 1926.1214(b)
(N) 29 CFR 1926.1216(a)(3)
(O) 29 CFR 1926.1216(b)(1)(ii)
(P) 29 CFR 1926.1216(b)(2)(v)
(Q) 29 CFR 1926.1216(d)(4) and (e)(3)
(R) 29 CFR 1926.1217(a)(4) and (c)(3)
(S) 29 CFR 1926.1219(a), (b), and (d)
(T) 29 CFR 1926.1219(e)
TOTALS

20,086
19,714
230,107
228,437
27
27
28,991
53,497
68
9,218
106,994
155,366
46,808
38
1,042,647

−28−

1,004,315
115,963
1,005,228
922,144
913
913
115,963
427,976
856
400,080
855,952
1,242,924
2,026,478
1,271
9,212,068

Proposed
Cost ($)
1,620,171
253
817
73,042
1,832,811
640,411
443,700
495,807
5,083,064
5,046,173
853
853
916,406
1,293,066
1,502
134,767
2,586,131
3,755,298
793,188
1,201
24,719,514