NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING/BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD
AND NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO TITLE 8
OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

 

Pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.4 and the provisions of Labor Code Sections 142.1, 142.2, 142.3, 142.4, and 144.6, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board of the State of California has set the time and place for a Public Meeting, Public Hearing, and Business Meeting:

At the Public Meeting, the Board will make time available to receive comments or proposals from interested persons on any item concerning occupational safety and health.

At the Public Hearing, the Board will consider the public testimony on the proposed changes noticed below to occupational safety and health regulations in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations.

At the Business Meeting, the Board will conduct its monthly business.

The meeting facilities and restrooms are accessible to the physically disabled. Requests for accommodations for the disabled (assistive listening device, sign language interpreters, etc.) should be made to the Board office no later than 10 working days prior to the day of the meeting. If Paratransit services are needed, please contact the Paratransit office nearest you.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO TITLE 8
OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
BY THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD

Notice is hereby given pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.4 and Labor Code Sections 142.1, 142.4 and 144.5, that the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board pursuant to the authority granted by Labor Code Section 142.3, and to implement Labor Code Section 142.3, will consider the following proposed revisions to Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, General Industry Safety Orders, Mine Safety Orders, and Tunnel Safety Orders of the California Code of Regulations, as indicated below, at its Public Hearing on August 15, 2002.

A description of the proposed changes are as follows:

This rulemaking culminates a process that began in 1985. To comply with the legislative mandate that all administrative regulations be reviewed as required by AB 1111, McCarthy, 1979, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Board) convened the first of a series of advisory committees in October 1985. During the first series of advisory committee meetings, it was recommended that all Title 8 explosive regulations be consolidated into one location, preferably into the General Industry Safety Orders (GISO). The review was completed but the rulemaking process was never started as the Governor, on July 1, 1987, defunded the program for private sector employers. Upon reinstatement of the Cal/OSHA Program for the private sector through the voter initiative process in November 1988, Board staff continued with the process of revising the explosives safety orders.

The process for review and revision of the GISO explosive regulations has resulted in three separate advisory committee units: five meetings in 1985-86, one meeting in 1991; and four meetings in 1997. Each meeting or series of meetings resulted in recommendations for revisions to the explosive regulations. It was determined during the 1997 meetings that the Board should act on the original recommendation to consolidate all the explosive regulations into the General Industry Safety Orders. The consolidation/reorganization consists of incorporating all Title 8 explosive regulations, those presently contained in the Construction, Mine, and Tunnel Safety Orders, into the General Industry Safety Orders. This proposal is the third and last explosive related rulemaking to bring California's explosive regulations into compliance with current industry practices and new technology. The first two rulemakings addressed a petition requesting a regulation change and a response to federal concerns that California's explosive regulations were not at least as effective as the counterpart federal regulations.

This proposed rulemaking action contains numerous non-substantive editorial, grammatical, spelling, and gender revisions. In addition, as the result of the addition or repeal of outdated or redundant regulations, sections/subsections have been renumbered. Also, the term "explosive materials" has been substituted wherever the word "explosives" or "blasting agent" appears to reflect the current industry language, and the addition of proper authority and reference citations that currently do not exist have been inserted. These proposed non-substantive revisions are not all discussed in the Informative Digest. However, these proposed revisions are clearly indicated on the regulatory text in underline and strikeout format. In addition to these non-substantive revisions, the following specific revisions are proposed:

It is proposed to repeal or transfer all the Construction Safety Orders (CSO) explosive regulations to Group 18 of the General Industry Safety Orders (GISO). The regulations in the CSO that duplicate regulations already in the GISO are proposed for repeal. The regulations proposed for transfer are proposed for transfer into the GISO. Those regulations that are unique to construction activities and are not currently contained in the GISO are proposed for transfer to the appropriate section in the GISO. Therefore, the repeal or transfer of the construction explosive regulations will have no effect on the regulated public other than to eliminate duplicative or obsolete requirements or to retain a formally industry specific regulation within the proposed reorganized explosive regulations. The final result of this proposal will be only one set of explosive regulations for the employer to refer to, as the explosives regulations will be located into one location in the GISO, making it more convenient for the user.

Existing Section 1504 contains definitions of terms used within the CSO regulations to ensure the devices and/or processes addressed within the regulations are clearly defined and understood.

Existing subsection (a) states that the following definitions shall apply in the application of these Orders. It also states that the singular number includes the plural, and the plural includes the singular.

It is proposed to delete the latter part of subsection (a) that states the singular number includes the plural, and the plural includes the singular. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as this language is obsolete and therefore, no longer applicable.

It is proposed to repeal, transfer, and transfer and editorially revise some of the definitions of Section 1504 to Section 5237 of the GISO, the definition section. The definitions that are proposed for repeal either already exist in the GISO and therefore, eliminate duplicative definitions or reflect obsolete industry practices, technology, terminology, or classification of materials and therefore, are no longer necessary. The definitions that are proposed for transfer to the GISO are either transferred verbatim or transferred and editorially revised for clarity to reflect changing industry practices, technology, terminology, or classification of materials.

The following definitions are proposed for repeal: Blasting Agent; Detonating Cord; Blasting Cap (the term “Blasting Cap” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is proposed for transfer under the term “Detonator”); Electric Blasting Cap (the term “Electric Blasting Cap” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is proposed for transfer under the term “Detonator”); Electric Delay Blasting Caps (the term “Electric Delay Blasting Caps” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is proposed for transfer under the term “Detonator”); Nonelectric Delay Blasting Cap (the term “Nonelectric Delay Blasting Cap” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is proposed for transfer with editorial revisions under the term “Detonator” as “Shock Tube, Gas Initiation, or Miniaturized Detonating Cord Blasting Caps”); Explosive Materials; Misfire; Powder (obsolete terminology); Primary Blasting; Primer; Safety Fuse (the term “Safety Fuse” already exists in the GISO as “Fuse, Safety”); Secondary Blasting; Springing; Stemming (the term “Stemming” already exists in the GISO as “Stemming Material”); Water Gels, Slurry Explosives; Two Broad Classes of Water Gels (obsolete classifications); Wires, Connecting (the term “Wires, Connecting” already exists in the GISO as “Connecting Wires”); and, Wires, Leading (the term “Wire, Leading” already exists in the GISO as “Leading Wires”).

The following definitions are proposed for transfer to Section 5237 of the GISO: Air Loader (editorially revised for clarity ); Blasting Operations (the term “Blasting Operation” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is revised to include the CSO definition); Detonator (the term “Detonator” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is revised to include the CSO definition with editorial revisions); Fuse Cap (transferred to the GISO under “Detonator” with editorial revisions); Emulsion (editorially revised for clarity); Explosives (the term “Explosives” already exists in the GISO; however, the definition is revised to include the CSO definition); Division 1.1 (editorially revised for clarity); Division 1.2 (editorially revised for clarity); Division 1.3 (editorially revised for clarity); Division 1.4 (editorially revised for clarity); Division 1.5; Division 1.6 (editorially revised for clarity); Licensed Blaster (transferred to the GISO under the new term “Blaster, Licensed”); Magazine, Type 1 (editorially revised for clarity); Magazine, Type 2 (editorially revised for clarity); Magazine, Type 3 (editorially revised for clarity); Magazine, Type 4 (editorially revised for clarity); Magazine, Type 5 (editorially revised for clarity); Wires, Bus (transferred to the GISO under the term “Bus Wires”); and, Wires, Permanent Blasting [transferred to the GISO and editorially revised under the term “Permanent Blasting (Leading) Wires”].

A portion of existing subsection (a) requires that all blasting operations be accomplished under the supervision of a licensed blaster. The provisions of this portion of subsection (a) are proposed for transfer to the GISO, Section 5238 as revised subsection (a). This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

The latter portion of existing subsection (a) requires that blasting operations shall include on site transportation, and storage of commercial explosives, blasting agents, and other materials used in blasting. The provisions of this portion of subsection (a) are proposed for repeal. The proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as Section 5236(a) addresses the same issue.

Existing subsection (b) requires the licensed blaster to be in good physical condition to be able to safely conduct blasting operations.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed for transfer to Section 5238 as revised subsection (b) of the GISO. This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) requires the licensed blaster to be able to understand and give written and oral orders. Also, a “NOTE” is included to permit persons to work under the supervision of the licensed blaster for purpose of qualifying for a California Blaster’s License.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed for transfer to Section 5238 as new subsection (c) of the GISO. This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) prohibits the handling and use of explosive materials while under the influence of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or other dangerous drugs.

This subsection is proposed for repeal. The proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as the proposed revisions to Section 5247(b) of the GISO address these same concerns.

Existing subsection (e) requires the licensed blaster to furnish satisfactory evidence of competency and have the qualifications to perform the type of blasting operations for the specific work site.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed for transfer to Section 5238 as new subsection (d) of the GISO. This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires the licensed blaster to show proof when requested by the Division or other authority having jurisdiction that the license is valid.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed for transfer to Section 5238 as new subsection (e) of the GISO. This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1552 consists of an informational “NOTE” regarding the blaster’s license qualifications that references the public back to Sections 344.20 and 344.21.

This reference is proposed for repeal as the regulated public has been notified of this transfer since 1977. Therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Section 1555. Blasting Accident Reports and Procedures.

Existing Section 1555 requires that the Division be notified in the event of a blasting accident or unusual occurrence (lightning strike, vandalism, etc.) affecting the safety of workers in which explosive materials are involved. Personal injury does not have to occur. The report is to contain the name and license number of the blaster(s) involved; names and occupations of persons injured, if any; type of explosive materials being used; method(s) of detonation; and an account of the incident. If injury did occur, the blasting operation is to be terminated until the Division has completed its investigation or authorized resumption of work.

The provisions of this section are proposed for transfer to Section 5248 of the GISO. This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1556 regarding the suspension of blaster’s license provision consists of an informational “CROSS-REFERENCE” that references the public back to Section 344.22.

This reference is proposed for repeal as the regulated public has been notified of this transfer since 1986 and therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that except when being used, transported, or in the custody of a carrier pending delivery, every explosive material is to be kept or stored in the appropriate magazine as specified in listed materials.

This subsection is proposed for repeal. This proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as Section 5251(a) of the GISO already contains similar requirements.

Existing subsections (b) through (f) contain requirements for quantity and storage restrictions for explosive materials. These requirements include the amount of explosive materials or the number of detonators that can be stored in one magazine; conditions when detonators may be stored with explosive materials; the maximum amount of explosive material that may be kept in a Type 3 (day box) magazine; that magazines are to located and protected to prevent accidental impact from falling objects or vehicles; that the magazines will be closed and locked except when transferring materials and only authorized persons will have access to the contents of the magazine; and that fuse caps with attached safety fuse(s) are not stored in an explosives magazine.

Subsections (b), excluding the “NOTE”; (c); (e); and (f) are proposed for transfer to Section 5251(h), (i), (j), and (k), respectively, of the GISO. The “NOTE” following subsection (b) is proposed for repeal as unnecessary as proposed Section 5262(c) is proposed to incorporate by reference the Institute of Makers of Explosives, Safety Library Publication No. 22, dated May 1993, that prescribes the minimum construction criteria for container and compartment magazines on vehicles and wheeled trailers. The provisions of subsection (e) are also currently contained in existing Section 5251(g) and (h) of the GISO that is proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5251(j). This proposal merely ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO 2and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

The provisions of subsection (d) are proposed for repeal as Section 5251(d) of the GISO already contains similar requirements and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (g) through (j) and (n) prohibit sources of ignition within the magazine; require that the explosives that have been in the magazine the longest be removed first and primers and fuse caps with attached safety fuse shall be used as soon as possible after making; prohibit the storage of anything except explosive materials in a magazine and that the magazine be kept clean and free of rubbish; requires magazines be located in accordance with specified tables; and require that brush, grass and combustible rubbish be kept cleared away from the surface of the magazine for a distance of not less than 50 feet.

These subsections are proposed for repeal. This proposed action will have no regulatory effect as Section 5256(b) and (d); Section 5256(f) and Section 5278(q); Section 5256(a); Section 5252(a); and 5251(e) of the GISO already address the contents of subsections (g) through (j) and (n), respectively.

A portion of existing subsection (k) is proposed for transfer to Section 5251(g) of the GISO. This proposed transfer to prohibit explosives storage magazines to be located within specified distances of low and high voltage electrical lines will have no effect on the regulated public as it is industry practice to maintain the 25 foot distance from low-voltage electrical lines and the 100 foot distance from overhead high-voltage electrical lines. This proposal merely transfers the existing regulation in the CSO to the GISO.

The other portion of existing subsection (k) regarding the proper placement of magazines should an electrical line break is proposed for repeal as this regulation is already contained in Section 5251(g) of the GISO. Therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (l) and (m) require that vehicular storage facilities for Types 2, 4, and 5 magazines have their wheels removed or be immobilized by kingpin locking devices; and that explosive materials will not be left unattended in a Type 3 magazine, but taken to a Type 1 or 2 magazine for storage.

These provisions are proposed for transfer to Section 5251 as new subsections (l) and (m) of the GISO, respectively. This proposed action will have no effect on the regulatory public as the action merely transfers existing regulations in the CSO to the GISO.

Existing Section 1562 contains the requirements for the construction and use of Types 1 through 5 magazines. These requirements address the type of materials to be used for the floor, walls and roofs of each type of magazine, wall fillers if required, doors and door locks, ventilation, types of fasteners, etc.

Except for subsection (a)(2) that requires the ground around Type 1 magazines to be sloped away for drainage or that other adequate drainage be provided, the remaining provisions of this section are proposed for transfer to the GISO as new Section 5253.1. Existing subsection (a)(2) is proposed for transfer to Section 5251(e)(1) of the GISO. This proposed action will have no regulatory effect other than to retain existing CSO regulations within the GISO.

This section contains only a “NOTE” regarding the storage of primers and detonators in second-class magazines and where the magazines should be located with respect to other second-class magazines.

This section is proposed for repeal, as it is informational only and has no regulatory effect. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that vehicles transporting explosive materials be marked at specified locations with signs of a minimum size and color.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as the provisions of proposed Section 5262(d) and the provisions of Section 5266(d) and Section 5267(c) of the GISO address the intent of subsection (a). Therefore, this proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that detonators and primers be locked and transported in Type 2 or Type 3 magazine until ready for use.

These provisions are proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5262(c) of the GISO. This proposed action will have no regulatory effect other than to retain existing CSO regulations within the GISO.

Existing subsection (c) requires that vehicles used for the transportation of explosive materials will be substantially constructed, be in good working order, have tightly constructed beds, and the sides and ends will be high enough to prevent the explosive material from falling off. In addition, this subsection prohibits explosives from being exposed to sparking metal during transportation.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as proposed Section 5262(f) contains the provisions of subsection (c). Therefore, this proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) permits only the driver and those persons directly involved with the blasting operation to ride on the vehicle transporting the explosive materials.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as the provisions of subsection (d) are contained in proposed Section 5262(i) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (e) requires that the transfer of explosive materials from storage to the blasting site be done with the least delay.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5262(r) of the GISO. The proposed action merely ensures continuity of enforcement and therefore, the proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires that vehicles not operating under ICC or State Fire Marshal regulations will be equipped with at least 2 UL approved 10:B.C. rated fire extinguishers. The fire extinguishers are to be mounted in a conspicuous location and the operator shall be trained in their operation.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as proposed Section 5262(g) of the GISO addresses the provisions of subsection (f) and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (g), which prohibits any unattended vehicle from being parked within 100 feet of an explosive materials magazine, is proposed for repeal as proposed Section 5262(m) of the GISO contains provisions regarding unattended vehicles containing explosive materials. Therefore, this proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (h) requires the driver of a vehicle transporting explosive materials to be familiar with the local, state and federal regulations governing the transportation of explosive materials.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as proposed Section 5262(i) addresses the provisions of subsection (h) and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (i) prohibits any source of ignition to be carried in or near any vehicle transporting explosive materials.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as the provisions of subsection (i) are contained in proposed Section 5262(p) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (j) prohibits transporting flammable liquids in the vehicle’s cargo space with explosive materials.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as the provisions of subsection (j) are contained in proposed Section 5262(o) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

The provisions of existing subsection (k), which prohibit the taking of a vehicle or conveyance carrying explosive materials inside a garage for repairs or servicing, has been transferred to proposed Section 5262(k). This proposal merely ensures retention of a regulation that presently does not exist in the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (l) prohibits the use of flame or arc producing devices on vehicles carrying explosive materials.

Subsection (l) is proposed for repeal as this provision is contained in proposed Section 5262(j)(1) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

The “NOTE” to Section 1564 is informational and directs the reader to the California Vehicle Code, Division 14, for additional requirements for explosive transportation requirements on

public roads and highways.

The “NOTE” is proposed for repeal as transporters of explosives on public highways and roads already have to be permitted by various agencies and are, or should be, knowledgeable of the California Vehicle Code requirements. In addition, the intent of the “NOTE” is stated in Section 5236 as proposed subsection (b)(2). Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (a) through (e) prohibit any source of ignition within 50 feet of where explosives are to be handled, except those sources necessary to light fuse or fire electric detonators in the area where the loaded holes are located; require that specific type tools be used to open certain types of powder containers; require paper cartons, sawdust, and other rubbish from explosive containers to be removed to a safe place and destroyed; prohibit the storage of explosive materials within 25 feet of an electric light or power circuit; and require all left over detonators, fuses, primers and other explosive materials to be promptly returned to the proper magazine(s).

These subsections are proposed for repeal as their provisions are already contained in proposed Section 5276(a) through (e), respectively, of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires that a positive method be provided to maintain a continuous record of the amount of explosive materials placed or removed (transferred) from each storage magazine. The date and signature of the person making the transfer is required.

The provisions of subsection (f) are proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5251(n) of the GISO. This action merely ensures retention of a regulation that presently does not exist in the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (g) through (i) and (k) require that primers not made up in a primer house are to be made up at a location at least 100 feet from any storage magazine and at a safe distance from other employees not involved in the blasting operations and also, the makeup or primer house shall comply with the design requirements of Section 5257 of the GISO; the loading of holes is not to start until all drilling is complete, drill holes are cleaned or blown out except when impractical; when loading and drilling operations are taking place simultaneously, at least 50 feet of separation is maintained between the operations; no vehicle traffic is permitted over loaded holes; and no explosive materials are to be abandoned.

These subsections are proposed for repeal as their provisions or intent are contained in proposed Sections 5257(c); 5278(a); 5278(c); and 5240(a), 5251(a), and 5278(s); respectively, of the GISO. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (j) requires that loaded holes shall not be left unattended.

It is proposed to transfer the requirement of subsection (j) to Section 5278 as new subsection (o)(2) as the proposed action merely ensures retention of a regulation which presently does not exist in the GISO and therefore, the proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (l) prohibits fighting fires when the explosive materials are in imminent danger of contact with the fire. The regulation also requires that the employees be removed to a safe area and the fire area guarded against intruders.

It is proposed to transfer subsection (l) to Section 5276 as new subsection (l) of the GISO. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (m) requires that insofar as possible, blasting operations above ground are to be conducted between sunrise and sunset.

This requirement is vague and ambiguous and therefore is proposed for repeal. In addition, this provision is also contained in Section 5291(a)(NOTE) of the GISO and is also proposed for repeal. For the above reason, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (n) prohibits the use of black powder for construction blasting.

This subsection is proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5243(a)(8) of the GISO. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as the proposed action merely ensures retention of a regulation that does not exist in the GISO.

Existing subsection (o) prohibits leaving explosive materials unattended at the blast site.

It is proposed to transfer the requirement of subsection (o) to Section 5278 as new subsection (o)(1). This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as the proposed action merely ensures retention of a regulation that does not exist in the GISO.

Existing subsection (p) prohibits employees from carrying detonators or primers on their person.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5268(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires either the employer or licensed blaster to fix the time of blasting.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provision is contained in Section 5291(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that prior to firing a shot, all persons in the danger area will be warned and ordered to a safe distance from the area. Also, a competent flagger is to be posted at all access points to the danger area.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5291(b) and (c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) requires that a signal be given, that all surplus explosive materials are in a safe place, all persons and vehicles are at a safe distance or under sufficient cover, and that adequate warning has been given.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5291(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) requires that the warning signal be given by a horn, whistle, or equivalent means, and be audible at the most distant point in the blast area. This subsection then gives what a warning, blasting and all clear signal is to consist of.

This subsection is proposed for transfer into the existing provisions of Section 5291(d) of the GISO. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (e) requires that the blasting signals be posted at one or more conspicuous locations and employees are to be made familiar with the signals and instructed accordingly.

This subsection is proposed for transfer to the GISO in Section 5291 as proposed new subsection (e). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

The “NOTE” to subsection (e) to direct the reader to other sections for return to site requirements is proposed for repeal as it is informational only and not a regulation and therefore, its repeal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) prohibits sounding the “ALL CLEAR” signal until the licensed blaster has inspected the blast area for misfires. In the event of a misfire, the requirements of Section 1568 are to be complied with before the signal is sounded.

This subsection is proposed for transfer to the GISO in Section 5291 as proposed new subsection (f), with a reference to Section 5293, regarding steps to be followed in the event of a misfire. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) prohibits air loaders to be used to load dynamite and states that their use shall comply with Section 5280 of the GISO.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are neither feasible nor an industry practice for air loading dynamite. It is not feasible because dynamite has high detonation sensitivity and not suitable to be loaded by air loaders. Also, it is not industry practice to air load dynamite. Therefore, the proposed repeal of subsection (a) will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that all machines and tools not used for the loading of explosive materials be removed from the immediate location of the holes to be loaded before the explosives are delivered.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5278(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) limits the number of persons who may be present during loading operations and permits only the loading crew, inspection personnel, and authorized supervisory personnel within 50 feet of the loading area.

Subsection (c) is proposed for repeal as these provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(d) of the GISO. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2) contain requirements for an alternative plan when the 50 foot minimum distance cannot be maintained. The requirements include a written notice to the Division and time periods in which the plan is to be submitted, notice of receipt and notice of approval/disapproval are to be given, types of explosive to be used, storm detection provisions, and required traffic barriers.

It is proposed to transfer subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2) to the GISO in Section 5278 as proposed subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2)(A)-(D). This proposal will ensure retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, it will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2) prohibit the springing of boreholes within 100 feet of any loaded primary blast hole and require that sprung holes are either allowed to cool or are cooled artificially before they are loaded.

These subsections are proposed for repeal as their provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(k) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d)(3) prohibits the use of drop fuses or any other method that calls for igniting the fuse prior to final placement of the charge.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(l) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (e) requires that boreholes be blown or washed out when they are not clear before loading.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in Section 5278(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires that the strength of a detonator be not less than a No. 6.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(f) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (g) requires that the detonator be encased in explosives when inserted into drill holes except when a safety primer or other acceptable means is used.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(g) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (h) allows only light tamping when loading explosives into a borehole. Also, primer(s) are not to be tamped.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(h) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (i) requires that explosive materials be confined in the blast hole with suitable incombustible stemming material.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5278(i) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (j) requires that wooden tamping poles have no metal parts other than nonferrous metal ferrules for extending the length of the pole.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5277(c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (k) requires that the end of a tamping pole be kept square and of such size as not to bypass the cartridges in the hole.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5277(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (l) permits only approved plastic poles to be used.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5277(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Also, subsection (l) contains a “NOTE” which explains why some plastics cannot be used for tamping explosives. The “NOTE” to subsection (l) is proposed for repeal as it is already addressed in existing Section 5277(d)Note that is proposed for transfer as a new “NOTE” to proposed Section 5277(a) and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that the shot area be examined for misfires after each blast and, if misfires are found or suspected to exist, they shall be reported to the appropriate person.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in Section 5293(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires, where possible, that the number of explosive charges in each blast are to be counted and compared to the number of explosions heard.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as it is vague, in addition to the fact that it is not possible to accurately count the number of explosions in a blast sequence. This proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as the regulation has not been actively enforced.

Existing subsection (c) requires a 30 or 60 minute wait, depending on the type of initiating system used, if a misfire occurs. Included in the regulation are two methods by which the misfire can be neutralized.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5293(b) and subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) prohibits the drilling of blast holes if there is the danger of intersecting a charged hole of misfired explosives.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5293(d) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (e) prohibits any other work to take place in the area during the mitigation of a misfire. Only the necessary crew is to be on site.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5293(e) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (a) and (b) prohibit activity of any kind that creates a hazard to explosives during secondary blasting operations and require the use of detonating fuse or instantaneous blasting caps when shots to be fired are in such close proximity that one shot could displace another.

These subsections are proposed for repeal as their provisions are contained in Section 5292(a) and (b), respectively, of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that ammonium nitrate be stored as required by a listed table.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5253(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that bags that have contained ammonium nitrate are to be kept distant from wooden buildings and destroyed after emptying.

It is proposed to transfer subsection (b) to the GISO in proposed Section 5240 as new subsection (h). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

The “NOTE” to subsection (b) contains information regarding the characteristics of ammonium nitrate when mixed with carbonaceous material.

This “NOTE” is proposed for repeal as the information is already contained in Section 5253(d)(NOTE) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) delineates the minimum parameters for testing and determining the average burning rate for safety fuse. The regulation also requires that a notice be prominently displayed at the work location stating what the fuse-burning rate is.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5295(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that only waterproof ring type crimps or waterproofing compound be used in wet work. The use of oil or grease is prohibited.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5297(e) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) requires that when safety fuse is capped, at least one inch of the fuse be cut from the coil of fuse to preclude the possibility of a damp end being put into the cap.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5297(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) requires that the fuse end be squarely cut and gently seated without twisting, and prohibits the use of a half hitch to secure the capped fuse to the cartridge. A “NOTE” is included recommending that a string tie method be used to secure the fuse to the cartridge.

The portion of existing subsection (d) regarding the square cutting of the fuse end is proposed for transfer to the GISO in proposed Section 5297 as new subsection (d). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. In addition, that portion of existing subsection (d) regarding the securing with a half hitch is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5297(f) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Further, the “NOTE” following subsection (d) is proposed for repeal as Section 5297 proposes to revise the diagram showing the recommended methods of attaching capped fuse to primer cartridge. Therefore, this proposed repeal will have no effect on the regulated public as the provisions of the “NOTE” will be contained in the revised diagram of Section 5297.

Existing subsection (e) requires that only a cap crimper designed for the purpose shall be used to attach the blasting cap to a fuse.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5297(c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires that the fuse be cut long enough to extend past the collar of the hole, but in no case will the fuse be less than 3 feet in length.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5298(a)(4) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (g) prohibits the use of damaged fuse.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5295(d) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Subsection (h).

Existing subsection (h) requires that the fuse be cut and capped at a location properly equipped and suited for such work.

Subsection (h) is proposed for transfer to the GISO in proposed Section 5297 as new subsection (d). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (i) requires that caps are to remain in the original shipping container until they are to be used.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in Section 5297(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (j) gives the parameters to be considered when lighting safety fuses and requires that no charge will detonate sooner than 2 minutes after the last fuse has been ignited. In addition, this subsection states that when 2 or more safety fuses in a group are lighted as 1 fuse, they may be considered as 1 fuse.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5298(a)(2), (a)(7), and (a)(6), respectively, of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (k) requires that 60 minutes elapse before entering the blast area if it is believed that not all charges have exploded.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5293(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

The “NOTE” to subsection (k) refers to Section 1568. This “NOTE” is unnecessary as Section 1568 is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in Section 5293(b) and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1571.1 contains the requirements for the selection, handling, and use of detonating cord. These requirements include, as examples, types of damage to be avoided, cord connections, inspections, and when the cord is to be brought into the blast area.

Section 1571.1 is proposed for transfer verbatim into the GISO as new Section 5298.1, Use of Detonating Cord. This proposal is to ensure retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1571.2 contains the requirements to be followed when conducting underwater blasting operations. These requirements include, as examples, dissimilar metal are not to be used, no vessel is to be within 1500 feet of the blast area, there is to be no swimming or diving in the blast area, blasting flags are to be displayed, etc.

Section 1571.2 is proposed for transfer verbatim into the GISO as new Section 5308, Underwater Blasting. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1571.3 prohibits the storage of explosive materials in caissons; prohibit employees, with the exception of the licensed blaster, lock tender and powder crew, from being in the air lock when explosive materials are present; specifies when detonators and explosives may be taken into pressure working chambers; specifies the responsibilities of the licensed blaster; specifies the type of explosive materials to be used; and requires bonding and grounding at or near the portal of all metal pipes, tracks, air locks and steel tunnel lining, with a maximum allowable distance between cross-bonding points.

Section 1571.3 is proposed for transfer verbatim into the GISO as new Section 5307, Blasting in Excavation Work Under Compressed Air. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) prohibits the use of explosive materials that could freeze at temperatures that can reasonably be expected at the blasting location. A “NOTE” is included providing information that thawing explosives is hazardous and should be avoided and that firmness of explosives during cold weather does not necessarily indicate they are frozen.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5276 as new subsection (j) and proposed Section 5241(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public. The “NOTE” following subsection (a) is also proposed for repeal as it is informational only and therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that a licensed blaster experienced in this type of work destroy deteriorated, damaged, or frozen explosive materials unfit for use. A “NOTE” is included recommending the explosive manufacturer be contacted for the most current product information and recommended disposal information.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5240(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public. The “NOTE” following subsection (b) is also proposed for repeal as it is only a recommendation and Sections 5240 and 5241 of the GISO already address the disposal and use of frozen explosives and therefore, this proposal will have no regulatory effect.

Existing subsection (c) is specific in prohibiting the reuse of packing materials, and how and where they should be destroyed.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5276(c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that the source of current for electric blasting be from one of three sources. In addition, this subsection states that when using light or power circuits, caps are to be connected in series, parallel, or a combination of the two. Also, caps to be fired using a blasting machine are to be connected in accord with the number and arrangement as designated by the machine manufacturer.

The portion of existing subsection (a) pertaining to the source of current is proposed for repeal as those provisions are contained in proposed Section 5299(b) and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. The latter portion of these provisions is proposed for transfer to Section 5299 as new subsection (c) of the GISO. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) prohibits the use of safety fuse where it would be difficult for the worker to reach adequate shelter within the time allowed by a burning fuse.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5298(a)(3) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) requires that all blasting caps in a circuit be of the same manufacturer.

Subsection (c) is proposed for repeal as similar provisions are contained in existing Section 5278(u) that is proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5299(j) of the GISO. Therefore, this proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as this provision is already contained in the GISO.

Existing subsection (d) contains distance requirements for the blasting line and power and light lines. In addition, this subsection contains precautions, such as securing wire with mats to prevent lead wires from coming into contact with energized electrical lines and running the lead and blasting wires at 90 degree angles to the high voltage lines to reduce unexpected blasts from induced current.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5276(d) and proposed Section 5279(a) and (b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (e) prohibits the use of ground or grounded wires to carry the blasting circuit current.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in proposed Section 5299(f) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires that permanent blasting lines, safety switches, and blasting switches be maintained in proper condition for service.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Sections 5300 through 5304 of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (g) requires that shot firing equipment be located where the operator is protected from the hazard of flying debris caused by the blast.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5291(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (h) requires the licensed blaster to conduct a survey for extraneous currents prior to loading the holes. If found, dangerous currents are to be eliminated prior to loading the holes.

The provisions of this subsection are proposed to be transferred into the GISO as proposed Section 5299(a). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (i) requires the connection and leading wires to be insulated solid copper or aluminum wire in good condition and of sufficient size to carry the necessary capacity.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in Section 5302(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that when a light or power source is used for firing shots, the electrical connections will be made in an approved weatherproof enclosure.

Section 1573.1(a) is proposed for transfer into the GISO in Section 5304 as new subsection (b). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) contains specific requirements and procedures regarding the blasting switch, blasting switch attachment plug, and blasting wires that are to be followed when blasting by means of an electrical circuit.

Section 1573.1(b) is proposed for transfer into the GISO in proposed Section 5304 as new subsection (f). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulations within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) contains requirements pertaining to the use of two-pole attachment plugs, minimum flexible cord wire size, minimum amperage capacity, locking plug and receptacles, and other related electrical safety concerns regarding the electrical connections.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in existing Section 5300(a) and (b) and existing Section 5302(a) and (b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

In addition, this subsection contains two informational “NOTES”. The first “NOTE” exempts portable generators used exclusively for blasting. The second “NOTE” directs the reader to a blasting circuit diagram in Appendix C, Plate C-27. In regards to the first “NOTE”, this “NOTE” is proposed for repeal as it is unnecessary as the regulation is specific to lighting a power circuit. Therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public. In regards to the second “NOTE”, this “NOTE” is proposed for repeal as it is informational only and directs the reader to the blasting circuit diagram. Therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) requires the keys to the blasting switch be kept by the licensed blaster and states who is to unlock and remain at the switch during circuit testing, repairs or extensions. There are also requirements for re-locking the blasting switch, designating someone to report back to the licensed blaster, surrender of the keys and location of a second set of keys.

Section 1573.1(d) is proposed for transfer to the GISO in Section 5299 as new subsection (k). This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulations within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that permanent blasting and temporary leading wires are to be single conductor, waterproof, and insulated copper wires with sufficient capacity for the required blasting current. In addition, this subsection states that in no case will the wire be smaller than No. 14 AWG.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in existing Section 5302(a) and (d) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires that splices be made and connected to conduct electricity and be mechanically secured, effectively insulated, and waterproofed.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are already contained in existing Section 5302(e) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) requires that bus wires be not smaller than No. 16 AWG solid copper wire or the equivalent that is recommended by the manufacturer for the expected conditions.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as the requirements contained in existing Section 5302(d) of the GISO regarding the use of the larger gage wire are those followed by the industry, per advisory committee, and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (d) requires that firing switches be the type, condition, and in the location for service intended; requires that they are equipped with double poles and are double throw switch with not less than sixty ampere capacity; and states other requirements to ensure the switch can be locked in specified conditions and other precautions to prevent inadvertent activation which could result in a premature activation.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in existing Section 5300(a) and existing Section 5301 of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1574 prohibits anyone except the licensed blaster or a blaster in training from operating or making the connections to the blasting machine. Also, the regulation prohibits circuit-connecting work to be accomplished until all other preparations are completed and all persons are safely located. Machine testing is to be done at intervals determined by the licensed blaster.

This section is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5305 of the GISO. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1575 prohibits the use of storage and flashlight batteries as a source of electric current for blasting.

This section is proposed for repeal as its provisions are currently contained in existing Section 5299(b) of the GISO that is proposed for repeal. The intent of this regulation is contained in proposed Section 5299(b) of the GISO which indicates that only devices designed for initiating electric detonation will be permitted for use. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1576 requires that blasting cap leg wires be kept short-circuited until connected to the bus wires. In addition, the bus wires are to be shorted until connected to the lead wires. The bare end of the lead wires are to be twisted together until ready for connection to a switch, blasting wires or blasting machine. Also, included is a “NOTE” describing how the bus wire connection should be made.

This section is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Section 5299(i) of the GISO. The “NOTE” to Section 1576 is also proposed for repeal as it is a recommendation and informational only. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1577 requires the blasting circuit to be tested prior to firing the shots. Also, this regulation states that a galvanometer designed for blasting work shall be used.

Section 1577 is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5299(h) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) prohibits the connection of lead wires to the permanent shot firing line until all personnel are at a safe location, with the exception of the person making the connection. In addition, this regulation states all unnecessary work at the site will be terminated during and after loading, before the shots are fired.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in Sections 5304(d) and 5305(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (b) requires a wait of at least 5 minutes before entering the point of blasting when electric blasting. The blasting switches are to be neutralized, locked in the off position, portable cords disconnected and the blasting wires shorted. Upon returning to the site, lead wires are to be disconnected from the end of the shot firing line and the ends shorted together.

The portion of existing subsection (b) requiring at least a five minute wait after electric blasting before returning to the point of blasting is proposed to be transferred to proposed Section 5291 as new subsection (j) of the GISO. This proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as it merely retains an existing CSO regulation in the GISO. The provisions of this subsection that address locking of the switch, disconnecting the portable cord, and shorting the blasting wires are proposed for transfer to Section 5304(f). This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as it merely retains an existing CSO regulation in the GISO.

The provision of this subsection that requires lead wires be disconnected from the end of the permanent shot firing line is proposed for repeal as this provision is addressed in Section 5305(c). This provision duplicates the requirement of Section 5305(c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (a) requires that electric blasting caps be retained in their original shipping containers or connected up for use within the specified distances contained in Appendix B, Plate B-15, Tables 1 through 5.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Sections 5262(e) and 5306(c) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Electric blasting caps are not to be transported in any vehicle equipped with a radio telephone or other radio transmitter unless they are still packed in their original container or in a metal covered box.

This subsection is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5262(b) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsections (c) through (e) contain the requirements for signing the approaches to areas where electric blasting operations are underway; where the signs are to be posted on public access; and the tables of distances for mobile and fixed radio, radar and television transmitters.

The provisions of subsection (c) regarding sign readings are proposed for transfer into existing Section 5306(a) of the GISO. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. The other provisions of subsection (c) regarding the specific color of the letters, the height of the letters, the size of the stroke of the letters, and the color of the sign’s background are proposed for repeal. These provisions are already specified in the GISO that contains the uniform specifications of the color and size of the letters and the color of the sign’s background, specifically, Sections 5258(e), 5266(d), 5267(c), 5346(b), 5348(i), 5312(m), 5314(d), and 5347(c). This proposal will eliminate the conflict between the other existing regulations regarding signage requirements and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Subsections (d) and (e) are proposed for repeal. These provisions are already contained in proposed Section 5306(b) and (c) and the accompanying Tables 1 through 5 of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

A “NOTE” to subsection (c) refers the reader to the State Department of Transportation, Manual of Traffic Controls for specific sign requirements. This “NOTE” is proposed for repeal as it is informational only and therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing Section 1580 prohibits electric blasting or preparation for blasting during an electrical storm and also states that all workers are to be removed from the site if loading is in progress when the storm arrives. In addition, this section states that provisions are to be made to warn crews when an electrical storm is approaching. A “NOTE” stating that an AM radio may be helpful to check on an approaching storm follows the regulation.

The first portion of this regulation pertaining to work during electric storms is proposed for repeal as its provisions are contained in proposed Section 5245(a) of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public. In addition, the latter portion of this regulation is proposed for transfer to proposed Section 5245 as new subsection (b) to ensure retention of the existing CSO regulation within the GISO and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

As stated above, the “NOTE” is informational only and its proposed repeal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Table 1 is the American Table of Distances for Storage of Explosive Materials. This table contains the parameters for the storage of explosive materials for specified quantities, when barricaded or unbarricaded, from inhabited buildings, public highways, passenger railways, and other explosive materials storage magazines.

It is proposed to transfer Table 1 to the GISO and rename it as Table EX-1 for consistency and to replace the existing Table EX-1 of the GISO with the CSO table, as it is the latest published table of distances. This proposed transfer and substitution will have no effect on the regulated public as this latest published version of the CSO table is already required for use by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the lead agency for the enforcement of explosive storage regulations.

Table 2 requires specified barricade thickness between different quantities of ammonium nitrate and blasting agents.

This table is proposed for repeal as it is already located in the GISO as Table EX-2 in Section 5253 and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public. The existing Table EX-2 in Section 5253 of the GISO is proposed for transfer to Section 5252 of the GISO to follow Table EX-1.

Plate B-14a shows the types of storage facilities where classes of explosive materials may be stored.

This table is proposed for transfer to the GISO as proposed Table EX-3 and to be revised for clarity. Proposed Table EX-3 of the GISO contains additional information showing that Class A, B, and C Explosives can be classified as either high or low explosives. This proposal ensures retention of the existing CSO table within the GISO with additional information and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Tables 1 through 5 contain minimum distance requirements for conducting electrical blasting operations in the vicinity of fixed and mobile radio, television, and radar transmitters.

Tables 1 through 5 are proposed for repeal. These provisions are already contained in Section 5306 and accompanying Tables 1 through 5 of the GISO and therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Plate C-26-a contains recommended methods of attaching capped fuse to primer cartridges. There are two drawings, one showing a string tie method and the other showing a laced method.

This plate is proposed for repeal as these drawings duplicate what is in Section 5297, Making Capped Fuses and Primers, of the GISO. Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public.

Plate C-27 contains a blasting circuit diagram.

This diagram is proposed for transfer into Section 5302 of the GISO with a minor terminology revision to provide a third example of a blasting circuit. This proposed transfer and minor revision to revise the word “shots” to “detonators” will have no effect on the regulated public as this proposal merely retains an existing CSO example of a blasting circuit diagram in the GISO and provides consistent industry terminology.

This proposal consolidates the explosive regulations from the Construction Safety Orders, Mine Safety Orders, and Tunnel Safety Orders into one location in the General Industry Safety Orders, making it more convenient for the user.

The title to Group 18 informs the employer/reader of the subject matter within the regulations. The regulations address specific requirements for explosives and pyrotechnics. It is proposed to substitute the term "Explosive Materials" for the existing title. This term is all-inclusive regarding the subject matter within Group 18. The proposed revision will have no effect on the regulated public as this term is already in common usage among those to whom these regulations are addressed.

The title to Article 113 informs the employer/reader that the subject of Article 113 is explosive materials and pyrotechnics. It is proposed to delete the reference to the phrase "and Pyrotechnics" because the term "Explosive Materials" includes pyrotechnics. This proposed revision will have no regulatory effect as the regulated public already acknowledges that pyrotechnics is a sub-element of explosive materials.

Existing subsection (a) indicates that Group 18 establishes minimum standards for the manufacture, assembly, possession, storage, transportation, and use of explosive materials and pyrotechnics at places of employment.

Revisions are proposed to subsection (a) to include the phrase “repacking and distribution” of explosive materials within the scope of these regulations. This proposal will require employers engaged in the repackaging and distribution of manufactured explosive materials to comply with the applicable regulations contained in Group 18, Article 119. In addition, it is proposed to delete the reference to the phrase “and pyrotechnics” because the term “explosive materials” includes pyrotechnics. This proposed revision will have no regulatory effect as the regulated public already acknowledges that pyrotechnics is a sub-element of explosive materials.

Existing subsection (b) contains exemptions to the Group 18 regulations.

Existing subsection (b)(2) exempts transportation of explosive materials under the jurisdiction of the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) and where the USDOT regulations are enforced by the California Highway Patrol.

A revision is proposed to subsection (b)(2) to delete the phrase “or pyrotechnics” because the term "Explosive Materials" includes pyrotechnics. Therefore, this proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as the reference to “pyrotechnics” is unnecessary. Also, it is proposed to include references to the permit sections of the Health and Safety Code and the California Vehicle Code to specify what Codes apply. In addition, a revision is proposed to delete the reference to “and where USDOT regulations are enforced by” as this statement is vague and ambiguous and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. This proposal provides clarification and will have no effect on the regulated public as the California Highway Patrol is already mandated by California's legislature and by agreement with USDOT to enforce these regulations on the public roads of California.

Existing subsection (b)(4) exempts construction or tunnel projects from these orders.

It is proposed to repeal the exemption for construction and tunneling projects to require compliance with the applicable orders within Group 18. The proposed revision will have no effect on the regulated public as all construction and tunnel explosive regulations are proposed for adoption into the General Industry Safety Orders making it more convenient for the user.

Existing Section 5237 contains definitions of terms used within the GISO regulations to ensure the devices and/or processes addressed within the regulations are clearly defined and understood.

It is proposed to revise Section 5237 to propose new definitions and definitions new to the GISO that are proposed for transfer from the CSO, MSO, and/or TSO; to revise existing definitions; and to repeal definitions to reflect changing industry practices, technology, terminology, or classification of materials. This proposal includes new definitions to the GISO, clarifies existing regulations, and removes definitions no longer applicable to the explosives industry.

The following are proposed new definitions: Air Loader (transferred from existing Section 1504 of the CSO and existing Section 6958 of the MSO); Air Supply Lines (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); ATF; Binary Components; Blast Site; Bus Wires; Car; Deflagration; Detonation; Emulsion; Face or Bank (new definition to the GISO and contained in the MSO); Face - Underground (new definition to the GISO and contained in the MSO and the TSO); Fume Classification (refer to existing Section 5244 of the GISO, existing Section 7206 of the MSO, and existing Section 8510 of the GISO); IME; Loading Hose (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Loading Line (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Loading Tube (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Mudcapping (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Permanent Blasting (Leading) Wires; Permissible (new definition to the GISO and contained in the MSO and the TSO); Pneumatic Loading; Processing; Propagation (Sympathetic Detonation); Remote Operation; Safety (Blast) Shield (transferred from “Operating Shield” in existing Section 5237 of the GISO); Sensitizer; Special Effects; Static Dissipating (transferred from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Trackless Vehicle; and, Train.

Revisions are proposed to the following existing definitions: ANFO; Barricade-Artificial; Barricaded; Blast Area; Blaster; Blasting Accessories; Blasting Agent; Blasting Cap (transferred and revised under “Detonator, (1) Fuse Caps” in Section 5237 of the GISO); Blasting Circuit; Blasting Machine; Blasting Operation; Bullet Resistant; Cap Crimper; Competent Person; Detonating Cord; Detonator; Electric Blasting Cap (transferred under “Detonator” in Section 5237 of the GISO); Electric Delay Blasting Caps (transferred under “Detonator” in Section 5237 of the GISO); Nonelectric Delay Blasting Cap (transferred under “Detonator” in Section 5237 of the GISO as “Shock Tube, Gas Initiation, or Miniaturized Detonating Cord Blasting Caps”); Explosive Materials; Explosives; Fireworks; Forbidden or not Acceptable Explosives; Fuse Safety; Highway; Igniter Cord; Special Industrial Explosive Devices; Special Industrial Explosive Material; Inhabited Building; Intraline Distance; Leading Wires; Magazine; Missed Hole; Operating Building; Primary Blasting; Primer; Propellant; Propellant-Actuated Power Devices; Pyrotechnics; Secondary Blasting; Slurry Explosives (transferred with revisions from existing Section 6958 of the MSO and existing Section 8405 of the TSO); Small Arms Ammunition; Springing; Squib-Electric; Stemming Material; Underground; and, Water Gels.

The following definitions are proposed for repeal: Chlorate Explosives (transferred under “Explosives Chlorate” in Section 5237 of the GISO); Division; Nitro-Carbo-Nitrate; Operating Shield (transferred under “Safety (Blast) Shield” in Section 5237 of the GISO); and, Tramway.

Existing Section 5238 [provisions are contained in existing Section 7200 of the MSO and existing Section 8505 of TSO] contains provisions regarding the employing of persons under the age of eighteen years for handling, transporting or engaging in activities using explosives.

This regulation is proposed for repeal as Labor Code, Section 1294 contains restrictions regarding the use of minors within industries using hazardous materials. Therefore, this proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as it is unnecessary.

It is proposed to revise the title of Section 5238 to read “Competency and Qualifications of Blaster” to comply with Labor Code, Section 7990 which requires the Division to determine qualifications for persons seeking an “explosive blaster’s license.” This proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as the proposal merely indicates the topic of the regulation.

These subsections are proposed for revisions to require: (a) that a "licensed blaster" having a valid blaster's license be on-site to accomplish or direct, and supervise blasting operations; (b) that the blaster is physically capable of conducting the operation; (c) that the blaster can communicate and understand written and oral orders; (d) that the blaster be able to furnish evidence of competency in the use and handling of explosive materials; and (e) that the blaster provide on request proof of a valid blaster’s license upon request by the Division or other authority having jurisdiction.

This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as these provisions already exist and are proposed for transfer from existing Section 1550(a), (b), (c)(NOTE), (e), and (f) of the CSO; existing Section 7275(a), (b), and (c), existing Section 7276(b), and existing Section 7279(a) and (b) of the MSO; and existing Section 8560(a), (b), and (c) and existing Section 8564(b) of the TSO, to reflect the proposed reorganization of the explosive safety orders.

A new subsection (f) is proposed to address the qualifications needed prior to applying for a blaster's license. This regulation will require that an applicant for a blaster’s license is at least 21 years of age. The applicant will have at least three years of experience in the type of blasting the license will apply to, and meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c) with respect to physical condition and the ability to communicate effectively.

This proposed regulation will have no effect on the regulated public as these provisions already exist and are proposed for transfer from existing Section 7276(a) and (c) of the MSO and existing Section 8561(a) and (c) of the TSO, to reflect the proposed reorganization of the explosive safety orders.

Existing Section 5239 [provisions are contained in existing Section 7201 of the MSO and existing Section 8506 of the TSO] requires all persons who handle or transport detonators or explosives to be trained in the hazards of the job and in the safe performance of their duties. It also requires that trainees be under the direct supervision of a competent person.

Revisions are proposed to the title of Section 5239 to include the phrase "and Trainees" as the regulation is proposed to be specific to trainees conducting blasting operations.

The substitution of the term "explosive materials" for "detonators" in Section 5239 is proposed to be consistent with current industry terminology. Also, it is proposed to include the phrase “conducting blasting operations” following the word “Trainees” in the second sentence as the regulation is proposed to clarify when the trainee is to be under the direct supervision of a licensed blaster. In addition, it is proposed to require the trainee to be under the supervision of a licensed blaster in lieu of a competent person.

The proposed revisions will have no effect on the regulated public as Labor Code, Section 6710 already requires blasting operations to be under the direct supervision of a licensed blaster.

Existing Section 5240 requires deteriorated, damaged or scrap explosives unfit for use be destroyed in a safe place by a competent person. The explosive is never to be buried. [Similar provisions are proposed for transfer from existing Section 1572(b) of the CSO, existing Section 5241(c) of the GISO, existing Section 7202 of the MSO, and existing Section 8507 of the TSO.]

It is proposed to revise the title of Section 5240 to read “Disposal of Explosive Materials” to address the disposal of explosive materials. This proposed action will have no effect on the regulated public as the proposal indicates what the regulation already requires.

It is proposed to codify the existing introductory text as subsection (a).

Subsection (a) is proposed for revisions to include “frozen and contaminated” explosives; to insert terminology currently used by the regulated public; to insert an alternative to destroying explosive materials, referencing “desensitized or otherwise made safe”; and to delete the reference to safety provisions by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the Institute of Makers of Explosives or other recognized authorities.

The inclusion of the terms “frozen” and “contaminated” explosives in proposed subsection (a) will have no effect on the regulated public as manufacturers recommend that frozen or contaminated explosive materials be disposed of. The provisions regarding “frozen” explosive materials also are contained in existing Section 1572(b) of the CSO and Section 5241(c) of the GISO. The proposed revisions to include “desensitized” and “otherwise made safe” permit the employer/user to use other methods to "neutralize" explosive materials other than outright destruction. The deletion of the references to the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the Institute of Makers of Explosives will have no effect on the regulated public as the users of explosive materials continue to depend upon the manufacturers/suppliers for information relating to use/disposal.

In addition, existing subsection (a) states that explosives shall never be buried or covered over by any materials as a means of disposal.

It is proposed to substitute the term “EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS” in place of the word “EXPLOSIVES” to reflect terminology commonly used in the industry. This proposal is editorial in nature and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

A new subsection (b) [transferred from existing Section 5331(a) of the GISO and revised for clarity] is proposed to require the employer to ensure that the destruction site is located away from inhabited buildings, public highways, passenger railways, operating buildings, and all other explosives. Subsection (b) also requires that the separation distance is not less than the distances for inhabited buildings contained in Table EX-1.

This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as existing Section 5331(a) already requires these provisions.

A new subsection (c) [transferred from existing Section 5331(c) of the GISO and revised for clarity] is proposed to require the employer provide a shelter or adequate protection for employees near the disposal area for emergency use.

This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as existing Section 5331(c) already addresses the requirement for a shelter. The addition of the phrase “of adequate protection for employees” merely provides the employer the opportunity to use alternative methods for protection of employees. The substitution of the term “disposal” for “burn” area will have no effect on the regulated public as burning is merely a form of disposal.

A new subsection (d) [transferred from existing Section 5331(d) of the GISO and editorially revised] is proposed to require the employer provide a warning device to be used when explosive materials are being destroyed.

This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as existing Section 5331(d) already requires these provisions.

A new subsection (e) is proposed to require that waste static sensitive explosive materials being transported is protected against the hazard of static electricity to prevent unwanted ignition or detonation.

This proposal will require the employer to develop procedures to eliminate all sources of static electricity when transporting waste static sensitive explosive materials.

A new subsection (f) is proposed to require the employer to transport incompatible waste explosive materials in different containers or vehicles.

This proposal will require the employer to ensure that incompatible waste is segregated before it is transported.

A new subsection (g) [transferred from existing Section 5331(b) of the GISO and editorially revised] is proposed which prohibits placing scrap explosive material at/in a burn location for at least 48 hours after the last burn.

This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as existing Section 5331(b) already requires these provisions.

A new subsection (h) [transferred from existing Section 1570(b) of the CSO] is proposed that prohibits the employer/blaster that uses bagged ammonium nitrate to make blasting agents from piling/storing the empty bags in or near wooden buildings.

This proposed revision will have no effect on the regulated public as existing Section 1570(b) already requires these provisions.

Existing subsection (a) [provision is contained in existing Section 7203(a) of the MSO and existing Section 8508(a) of the TSO] contains a provision against the use of chlorate explosives in blasting operations.

Subsection (a) is proposed for revision to include “Perchlorate high” explosives as well as Chlorates in the prohibition for use as a blasting agent. This proposal prohibits employees/operators from using Chlorates and Perchlorate high explosives for blasting operations.

Existing subsection (b) [provision is contained in existing Section 7203(b) of the MSO and existing Section 8508(b) of the TSO] requires that low freezing explosives be of a type that will not freeze at any temperature that may reasonably be expected.

This subsection is proposed for revisions to editorially revise the syntax of the regulation and to delete an unnecessary modifier and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) [provision is contained in existing Section 7203(c) of the MSO and existing Section 8508(c) of the TSO] advises the user to seek help from the manufacturer before using or attempting to use frozen explosives.

It is proposed to repeal subsection (c) as it is advisory only and not enforceable, and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. In addition, it is not industry practice to use explosive materials that have been frozen. The handling of frozen explosives is contained in proposed Section 5240(a) of the GISO.

Existing Section 5242 [provisions are contained in existing Section 7204 of the MSO and existing Section 8509 of the TSO] requires that water gels containing an explosive be classified as an explosive; water gels containing no explosives which are cap sensitive be classified as an explosive, to be manufactured, transported, stored and used as specified for explosives; and water gels containing no substance in itself classified as explosives, and, which are not cap sensitive, be classified as blasting agents, to be manufactured, transported, stored and used as required for blasting agents.

It is proposed to revise subsection (a) to include the term "Cap sensitive" before the term “water gels” and to include the phrase “and those” to incorporate the requirements of existing subsection (b) into subsection (a). Also, it is proposed to include the modifier "high" before the word “explosive” and to editorially delete the word “an” to be consistent with the explosive industry's classification of these types of explosive materials. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as it combines the similar requirements of subsections (a) and (b) into subsection (a) and thereby, combines similar requirements in subsection (b).

Existing subsection (b) contains requirements similar to those in subsection (a) and therefore, is proposed for transfer into subsection (a) of Section 5242 to combine similar requirements. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (c) states that water gels containing no substance in itself classified as an explosive and which are not cap-sensitive as defined in Section 5237 under “Blasting agents” shall be classified as blasting agents and manufactured, transported, stored, and used as specified for blasting agents in this article.

It is proposed to revise subsection (c) to include reference to Article 120 that contains requirements for mixing blasting agents. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as Article 120 also covers the manufacturing of water gels.

Existing Section 5243 [provisions are contained in existing Section 7205 of the MSO] contains specific requirements for the precautions necessary when using black powder for blasting.

Editorial revisions are proposed to renumber the subsections, to remove specific gender references, and to include the term "licensed blaster" in subsection (a)(2) to be consistent with Labor Code, Section 7990 and the Division’s Administrative regulation, Section 344.20.

These provisions are editorial and reflect current industry terminology, and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public. The proposal to include the term “licensed blaster” will have no effect on the regulated public as Labor Code, Section 7990 and the Division’s Administrative regulation, Section 344.20 already require blasters to be licensed by the Division.

Subsection (a)(5), which prohibits a bonfire within 500 feet of any black powder not stored within a magazine, is proposed for revision to delete the term "Bon" from "Bonfires" to recognize all fire related sources of ignition are prohibited within 500 feet of any black powder not stored within a magazine. This proposed revision will have no effect on the regulated public as a "bonfire" is nothing more than a special term for a large fire built in the open air.

Subsection (a)(8) is proposed for revision to prohibit the use of black powder for construction blasting. This prohibition is proposed for transfer from existing Section 1565(n) of the CSO. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as this provision is proposed for transfer from existing Section 1565(n) of the CSO to reflect the proposed reorganization of the explosive safety orders.

Existing Section 5244 [provisions are contained in existing Section 7206 of the MSO and existing Section 8510 of the TSO] contains the specifications for determining fume classification for explosives used underground.

Existing subsection (a) requires that the explosives be classified according to the volume of oxygen, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide produced by a standard cartridge.

This subsection is proposed for repeal. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as revised subsection (a), existing subsection (c), of Section 5244 addresses the classification and use of explosive materials.

Existing subsection (b) describes a standard cartridge. Also, this subsection states that where explosives are not packed in a standard cartridge for testing, then the volume must be comparable to that contained in a standard cartridge.

This subsection is proposed for repeal. The proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as the fume test is performed by the manufacturer and the necessary test criterion is contained in revised subsection (a), existing subsection (c), of Section 5244.

Existing subsection (c) requires that the necessary test be performed in a Bichel Gauge according to the standard procedure of the U.S. Bureau of Mines.

Revisions are proposed to indicate what the tests are to determine, referencing the table within Section 5244; to delete an unnecessary phrase that refers to this section; to delete the phrase “in a Bichel Gauge” and to include the phrase “for ‘toxic gas test’” as the “toxic gas test” method of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is the current practice in determining fume classes; and to update the referenced title of the appropriate federal agency. The existing table following existing subsection (d) is proposed to immediately follow proposed subsection (a), with editorial revisions, and to include a proposed new heading for this table to incorporate the specifications for a standard cartridge [provisions that are currently contained in existing subsection (b) of Section 5244] to provide clarity.

These proposed revisions will have no effect on the regulated public as the federal agency has merely undergone a name change and the fume class table is proposed to be relocated to a more appropriate location, with editorial revisions, and to include a heading to the table to clearly indicate its purpose.

Existing subsection (d) requires that the volume of carbon monoxide plus hydrogen sulfide produced be expressed in terms of cubic feet per standard cartridge with exceptions. A table is shown specifying the appropriate fume classes.

Revisions are proposed to transfer the provisions of subsection (d) to proposed subsection (a), and to relocate and revise the table to incorporate the specifications for a standard cartridge. This proposal will have no effect on the regulated public as it merely results in the reformatting of existing regulations.

Existing subsection (e) is specific as to when an explosive can be classified as a Fume Class 1 explosive.

This subsection is proposed for transfer to proposed subsection (a) as the requirements of this subsection are to be incorporated into the proposed revisions of proposed subsection (a) and therefore, will have no effect on the regulated public.

Existing subsection (f) requires the containers of fume class explosive be identified and