Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

32440

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 116 / Monday, June 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2

ability to implement other ETS
provisions e.g., physical distancing and barriers.
If an employee uses a respirator in place of a facemask, then the employer must ensure that the respirator is used in accordance with the mini respiratory protection program section of the ETS or in accordance with the Respiratory Protection standard. For example, if an employee that is required to wear a facemask instead chooses to wear a respirator when performing an aerosolgenerating procedure AGP on a patient who is not suspected or confirmed with COVID19, the ETS only requires the employer to ensure that the respirator is used in accordance with the mini respiratory protection program section, rather than in accordance with the Respiratory Protection standard, because there is no exposure to a suspected or confirmed source of COVID19 see 29 CFR
1901.502f4ii. In contrast, employees performing AGPs on patients with suspected or confirmed COVID19
must be provided with respirators that are used in accordance with the Respiratory Protection standard see 29
CFR 1901.502f3i. Additionally, employers will still be obligated to provide a respirator that is used in accordance with the Respiratory Protection standard for any AGPs performed on patients suspected or confirmed with an airborne disease, such as tuberculosis or measles.
II. Experience From the Respiratory Protection Standard 29 CFR 1910.134
In determining the need for a mini respiratory protection program section, the agency considered its experience with the existing Respiratory Protection standard. While the majority of the Respiratory Protection standard pertains to the use of respirators that are required for the protection of employees against airborne hazards, there is one provision allowing, but not requiring, employers to permit employees to wear respirators in situations where respirators are not required for protection against airborne hazards. See 29 CFR 1910.134c2. In establishing the requirements of this provision of the Respiratory Protection standard, OSHA also establishes some general concepts to guide respirator use.
These concepts include: 1 That the respirator use will not in itself create a hazard; 2 that the employer provides the respirator user with information about the safe use and limitations of respirators; and 3 that the respirator is cleaned, stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user. 29 CFR 1910.134c2i and ii.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:53 Jun 17, 2021

Jkt 253001

OSHA has historically imposed a different set of requirements on employers for when respirators are required to protect employees from airborne hazards as compared to when they are not required for protection against airborne hazards but are instead used voluntarily by employees. More specifically, paragraph c1 of the Respiratory Protection standard requires employers to develop and implement a comprehensive written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements whenever respirator use is required by the standard. As noted earlier, these elements include, but are not limited to, respirator selection and use, medical evaluation, fit testing, respirator maintenance and care, and training. In contrast, paragraph c2 of the Respiratory Protection standard requires employers to implement only a subset of these elements for the voluntary use of respirators, greatly reducing the obligations of employers who allow their employees to use respirators when such use is not required for employee protection. In the 1998 rulemaking, OSHA determined that paragraph c2 is necessary because the use of respirators may itself present a health hazard to employees who are not medically able to wear them, who do not have adequate information to use and care for respirators properly, and who do not understand the limitations of respirators. Paragraph c2 is intended to allow employers flexibility to permit employees to use respirators in situations where the employees wish to do so, without imposing the burden of implementing an entire respirator program. At the same time, it will help ensure that such use does not create an additional hazard and that employees are provided with enough information to use and care for their respirators properly 63 FR 1190, January 8, 1998.
The vast majority of voluntary respirator use situations under the Respiratory Protection standard have historically involved the use of FFRs, worn merely for an employees comfort 63 FR 1190, January 8, 1998. Examples include employees who have seasonal allergies requesting a FFR for comfort when working outdoors and employees requesting a FFR for comfort while sweeping a dusty floor 63 FR 1190, January 8, 1998. In contrast, respirator use situations under this section of the ETS will involve employers who provide a respirator or employees who want to wear a respirator, out of an abundance of caution, as enhanced protection against COVID19. They may
PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

also opt to wear respirators other than FFRs e.g., elastomeric respirators, PAPRs, particularly given the supply shortages of N95 FFRs experienced during the COVID19 pandemic. Thus, the circumstances of respirator use in the ETS are not merely to accommodate individual conditions or comfort, but rather in recognition of some increased risk due to asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission of COVID19
that is not expected to rise to the level where respirators are required for exposure to suspected or confirmed sources of COVID19.
OSHA emphasizes that while the new set of requirements for respirator use under the ETS differ in some aspects from those specified under the Respiratory Protection standard, their intent remains the same; that is, employers who provide respirators at the request of their employees or who allow their employees to bring their own respirators into the workplace must ensure that the respirator used does not present a hazard to the health of the employee.
In the 1998 rulemaking, OSHA
concluded in the rare case where an employee is voluntarily using other than a filtering facepiece dust mask respirator paragraph c2ii, the employer must implement some of the elements of a respiratory protection program, e.g., the medical evaluation component of the program and, if the respirator is to be reworn, the cleaning, maintenance, and storage components.
An exception to this paragraph makes clear that, where voluntary respirator use involves only filtering facepieces dust masks, the employer is not required to implement a written program. While medical evaluation is required when employees are voluntarily wearing respirators other than FFRs under the Respiratory Protection standard, there are no requirements under the ETS to provide medical evaluations for employees wearing such respirators. The agency concludes that it would be too onerous and costly for employers to provide medical evaluations to employees wearing elastomeric respirators or PAPRs in place of FFRs used in accordance with crisis capacity strategies during the short period of the ETS. However, OSHAs experience with its Respiratory Protection standard suggests that respiratory protection can still be effective even when subject to particular safety provisions, but not subject to the full range of requirements.
In place of medical evaluations, the agency has included a training requirement on how to recognize medical signs and symptoms that may
E:FRFM21JNR2.SGM

21JNR2